Alabama Association of School Boards
June 23-26
Register at www.AlabamaSchoolBoards.org Board Attorneys Annual Meeting Saturday, June 23, 12:30-5 p.m. Sunday, June 24, 7:45 a.m.-12:30 p.m.
Roles and Responsibilities Orientation Saturday, June 23 Noon Registration 12:30 p.m. Key Work of the Board 2 p.m. Financial Primer (Part 1) 3 p.m. Ethics & the School Board 4 p.m. Navigating Legal Issues and Personnel Sunday, June 24 7 a.m. Non-denominational Service 7:30 a.m. Registration & Breakfast 8:15 a.m. Financial Primer (Part 2) 9:30 a.m. Meetings 10:45 a.m. Dealing with the Public and Media Noon Adjourn
* This abbreviated, tentative schedule is subject to change.
AASB Summer Conference Sunday, June 24 1 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 6:15 p.m. Monday, June 25 7:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m. 9:30 a.m. 10:45 a.m. 12:30 p.m. 2:30-4 p.m. 2-4 p.m. Tuesday, June 26 7:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m. 10:30 a.m. Noon
Registration & Exhibits Open Turning High-Poverty Schools into High-Performing Schools Welcome Reception
Breakfast & Exhibits Transforming Education: A Bold Journey Legislative Recap Flexibility & Innovation Board Presidents Roundtable Bonus Session: Students First Caucus Meeting
Breakfast & Exhibits Ratchet Up Career Tech You’re Not That Great: A Motivational Speech Conference Adjourns
OFFICERS PRESIDENT Steve Foster Lowndes County PRESIDENT-ELECT Katy Smith Campbell Macon County VICE PRESIDENT Pam Doyle Muscle Shoals IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT Florence Bellamy Phenix City
BOARD OF DIRECTORS DISTRICT 1 Stephanie Walker Brewton DISTRICT 2 Don Nichols Perry County DISTRICT 3 Roxie Kitchens Troy DISTRICT 4 Charlo e Meadows Montgomery County DISTRICT 5 Kim Webb Benos Vestavia Hills DISTRICT 6 Larry B. Stewart Calhoun County DISTRICT 7 Tracy Estes Winfield
PUBLICATION POLICY
ON THE COVER: photos©iStockPhoto.com
DISTRICT 8 Jim Fisher Florence
DISTRICT 9 Dr. Jennie Robinson Huntsville STATE BOARD LIAISON Mary Sco Hunter
STAFF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Sally Brewer Howell, J.D. CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER Ken Roberts, C.P.A. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC RELATIONS Denise L. Berkhalter DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS Lissa As lla Tucker DIRECTOR OF BOARD DEVELOPMENT Susan Salter MEETING/MARKETING COORDINATOR Angela Ing MEMBERSHIP COORDINATOR Debora Hendricks EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT Tammy Wright BOOKKEEPER Morgan Hilliard STAFF & TECHNOLOGY ASSISTANT Lashana Summerlin ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANTS Donna Norris Tanja Rains CLERICAL ASSISTANTS Ka e Schroeder Denisha Stewart
Trends, Research&Dates
UPFRONT
Compiled by Denise Berkhalter
AASB Welcomes District Directors Congratulations to the newest additions to the AASB Board of Directors. District Directors Donald “Don” Nichols of Perry County and James “Jim” Fisher of Florence officially joined AASB’s Board of Directors at the close of last year’s convention. Nichols is District 2 director. A member of the Perry County school board since 2004, Nichols has served Nichols on AASB’s Pre-Kindergarten Committee and as part of the Leader to Leader network. He is a Master school board member in the AASB School Board Member Academy. Fisher is District 8 director and has been a member of the Florence Board of Education since 2008. He has served on AASB’s Resolutions Committee and Fisher as a member of the Leader to Leader network. He is at Level 3 in the academy. Existing directors, Charlotte Meadows of District 4 and Larry Stewart of District 6, are serving their second two-year term on the board of directors. Meadows was re-elected, and Stewart was unopposed.
DID YOU KNOW?
94%
CONGRATULATIONS! 13 Alabama Schools Named Torchbearers The following highpoverty, highperforming Alabama public schools have earned the prestigious title of 2011-2012 Torchbearer Schools: x x x x x x x x
of surveyed parents of African American students say an adult checks their child’s homework (grades K-8). That compares to 91 percent of parents of Hispanic students and 82 percent of parents of white students. Check out Family-School-Community Partnerships 2.0: Collaborative Strategies to Advance Student Learning, http://neapriorityschools.org.
x
— National Center for Education Statistics
x
x x x
Wilkerson Middle School, Birmingham City Morris Slingluff Elementary School, Dothan City Phillips Elementary School, Marion County Anna F. Booth Elementary School, Mobile County Calcedeaver Elementary School, Mobile County George Hall Elementary School, Mobile County William Henry Brazier Elementary School, Mobile County Indian Springs Elementary School, Mobile County Dr. Robert W. Gilliard Elementary School, Mobile County Spencer Elementary School, Mobile County WD Robbins Elementary School, Mobile County Orchard Elementary School, Mobile County Highland Avenue Elementary School, Montgomery County
MARK YOUR CALENDAR Schools will celebrate a variety of observances in March, including: x Music in Our Schools Month www.menc.org x National Nutrition Month www.eatright.org x Women’s History Month www.nea.org April observances include: x Child Abuse Prevention Month www.childwelfare.gov x National Poetry Month www.poets.org
Parents Want to be Involved Effective parent involvement comes when a true partnership exists between schools and families. Creating that partnership, especially around academics, is what works for student achievement. To improve that partnership, here are some actions boards can take: x
x
x
x x x x
x
Recognize that parents, regardless of income, education or cultural background, are involved in their children’s learning and want their children to do well. Survey parents and teachers to understand their perspectives on parent involvement. Ask how parents want to be involved and how teachers want parents to be involved. Work to create a common understanding of how parents could best support their child’s education and how teachers could communicate with parents. Identify barriers to achievement within schools and consider whether parents can help address these. Train teachers on how to develop homework assignments that involve parents. Regularly involve parents in their child’s homework and report on the results of doing so. In middle school and high school, talk clearly to parents about the courses and grades their students will need to succeed. Continue to track the effects of involvement in order to use the schools’ time and resources wisely and invest in what works best. — www.centerforpubliceducation.org
Getting your copy?
Looking for your weekly newsletter on education legislation and policy? This newsletter is now emailed each week as the 2012 Legislative Session continues. If you aren’t getting your copy or if you want to subscribe, contact AASB at 800/562-0601 or email lsummerlin@AlabamaSchoolBoards.org. Send email address changes to dhendricks@AlabamaSchoolBoards.org.
BY THE NUMBERS
$42,299
is the average annual salary earned by males ages 18 to 24 with at least a bachelor’s degree, while those with less than a ninth-grade education earn just $20,041. — National Center for Education Statistics
EDUCATION & THE LAW By James R. Ward III, Alabama State Department of Education
What are they hiding? Searches of students & their property under the Fourth Amendment
iStockphoto.com
Few school principals or superintendents entered the field of education because of a desire to navigate the waters of constitutional law. Nevertheless, school officials may be forced to do just that when deciding whether to search a student or a student’s property for evidence of suspected wrongdoing. What if that student was using his cell phone during a secure test, can a school administrator search it? What if the administrator sees the student surrounded by a cloud of cigarette smoke in the bathroom, can he constitutionally search her purse? If making on-the-fly decisions that involve constitutional law sounds unappealing, then take heart. This article will help school officials
avoid violating student rights, allow them some comfort in knowing they can help protect students from illegal or wrongful student activity, and minimize the risk of any successful lawsuit against their school system. Any explanation of the law of search and seizure of persons or property should begin with the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. That Amendment provides:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
This amendment does not protect all expectations of privacy; only those that society would recognize as reasonable. That noted, the Fourth Amendment does prohibit unreasonable searches and seizures conducted by public school officials. Of course, the question becomes: “How does one know whether he is conducting a reasonable search?” Thankfully, case law provides some examples. Recognizing that school teachers and administrators are not law enforcement officers, the United States Supreme Court determined in New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985) that school officials do not need a search warrant to search a student. Additionally, probable cause that the subject of the search has violated or is violating the law is not required. Instead, the legality of a search of a student depends on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search. Fortunately for school officials, even if a court determines that a search was not legal under the Fourth Amendment, generally the teacher or principal who conducted the search will still be immune from individual liability as long as the search was not a clear violation of the student’s rights. A search’s reasonableness, under all the circumstances, means: (1) the action was justified at its inception, and (2) the search as it was actually conducted was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the search in the first place. A search is justified at its inception when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or school rules. This justification for a search can also be described as a moderate chance of finding evidence of wrongdoing in contrast to the fair probability or substantial chance of finding evidence of wrongdoing that must exist for law enforcement officers.
A search is permissible in its scope when the measures used are reasonably related to the goals of the search and are not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the wrongdoing. In other words, school officials will not violate a student’s Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure if their search is based upon reasonable suspicion that the student is violating a school rule or the law and the search is reasonable in scope. For example, in the T.L.O. case, an assistant principal searched a student’s purse for cigarettes when she was caught smoking in the bathroom, a violation of a school rule. When he saw rolling paper, he searched for other contraband. He found marijuana, a pipe, plastic bags, lots of money and other things related to selling drugs. The Supreme Court concluded that the search, including the expanded search once the rolling paper was discovered, was reasonable under all the circumstances.
School officials will not violate a student’s Fourth Amendment right ... if their search is based upon reasonable suspicion that the student is violating a school rule or the law and the search is reasonable in scope. Although hundreds of cases exist from which one could draw examples to illustrate these principles, perhaps two cases concerning the search of student cell phones will be most helpful to the educator in the field. One case from Pennsylvania demonstrates a cell phone search that went too far. In that case, Klump v. Nazareth Area School District, 425 F. Supp. 2d 622 (E.D. Pa. 2006), students were allowed to carry, but not use or display, cell phones during school hours. The school administrators in the case used a student’s accidental violation of the policy — the phone fell out of the student’s pocket — as a pretext to explore the student’s personal life by making calls with the student’s phone to nine other students, viewing the student’s text messages, listening to his voice mail and even having an instant messaging conversation with the
iStockphoto.com
student’s younger brother without telling him who they were. The District Court determined that not only were the actions of the school administrators wrong, but they were so wrong that they were clearly unconstitutional. As a result, the school administrators were not entitled to qualified immunity from a lawsuit the student brought. In contrast, in a Mississippi case, J.W. v. Desoto County School District, slip op., No. 2:09-cv-00155-MPM-DAS, (N.D. Miss. Nov. 1, 2010), a district court held that the school officials were entitled to qualified immunity because the search of the phone was not clearly unconstitutional. The court also opined that the search of the phone, both at its inception and in its scope, was reasonable under all the circumstances. In this case, though, cell phones were banned at school; the student was seen using his cell phone; and, the court noted, it was reasonable for a school official to seek to determine to what end the student was improperly using his phone. Concerning the search of cell phones or other digital devices, you may wish to review a copy of the state Department of Education’s secure test policy and suggested guidelines regarding searches of digital devices. (See page 9.) Other situations are worth noting as well, particularly the recent United States Supreme Court case that held that a strip search of a 13year-old student was unconstitutional. (Safford Unified School District #1, et al., v. Redding, 129 S. Ct. 2633 (2009)). In that case, the student was suspected of having pain pills at school that were banned without advance permission. She was ultimately stripped down to her bra and underpants and asked to pull them to the side, exposing her breasts and pelvic area to some degree. The court determined that the initial search of the student’s property was OK, but the strip search was not. The lesson this case teaches is that the importance for the search at the inception must be reasonably balanced against the scope of the actual search. Overall, school officials should ask these questions when contemplating searching a student or his or her property: 1. Is it reasonable for me to suspect that searching this student or his or her property will produce evidence that the student was violating a school policy or the
law? 2. If I conduct a search of this student or his property, am I limiting it to what is reasonably related to the goals of the search when considering the age and sex of the student and the wrongdoing I suspect? If they suspect that a student has violated a law or rule that is so serious that it justifies a strip search, they should get the local superintendent’s or school board attorney’s opinion before doing so. Bear in mind that it is the reasonableness of the search under all of the circumstances that is important. By applying these principles, school officials will avoid violating student rights, help ensure that the goals of public education will be carried out and minimize the risk of any lawsuits against their school system. James Ward is an associate general counsel for the Alabama Department of Education. He thanks Susan Crowther for her help in researching searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment.
How to handle the search and seizure of digital devices during secure testing The penalty for using a cell phone or other digital device to cheat on a secure state assessment is major, which is why boards of education should make certain students (and preferably parents) have been notified verbally and in writing, when possible, that: x The possession of a digital device is strictly prohibited during the administration of a secure test; x The device will be confiscated and is subject to a search if it is used during the administration of a secure test; and x The student’s test will automatically be invalidated if the device is used during the administration of a secure test. If a student knows the rules on digital devices during testing and is still seen shirking them, the Alabama Department of Education suggests taking the following steps: CONFISCATE DEVICE 1. The test administrator should confiscate the device. Smart phones should temporarily be turned off to help prevent any remote-access data-wipe. 2. The test administrator should deliver the device as soon as practicable to a school administrator. 3. A “chain of custody” list should be kept to record everyone who had possession of the device and when the device was transferred to someone else. The device should be stored by the school administrator in a secure location until the next step is taken. INVESTIGATE CLAIM 4. The school administrator should learn the facts regarding the seizure of the device from the test administrator and determine whether it is reasonable under all the circumstances to believe that the student could have been using the device to cheat or for some other unpermitted purpose. 5. If the school administrator determines that the student was merely in possession of the
digital device, then it may be returned to the student in accordance with the school system’s policy. If the school administrator believes it is reasonable to suspect the student was using the device for an impermissible purpose, then he or she may search the device, limiting the search to only what is necessary to reasonably determine whether the student was cheating, copying secure test information or otherwise violating a school rule. The school administrator should follow the local policy requirements regarding the search of student property. ACTIVATE POLICY 7. If no wrongful activity is discovered on the device then it may be returned to the student in accordance with the school system’s policy. 8. If wrongful activity is discovered on the device, either in regard to the test or other wrongful activity inadvertently discovered on the device, then the school administrator should secure the device in accordance with the school system’s policy and notify the system test coordinator, school system attorney or superintendent as appropriate. If the device is a smart phone, the device should be turned off after the search to help prevent a potential remote-access data-wipe. 9. Any disciplinary actions should be taken in accordance with the school system’s disciplinary policy. 10. Test irregularity reports should be completed in accordance with the Alabama State Department of Education’s student assessment handbook. 11. In any situation involving the search and seizure of a student’s property, a school administrator should consult with his or her supervisor in accordance with the school system’s policy. Source: Alabama State Department of Education’s Suggested Guidelines for the Search of Digital Device Seized During the Administration of a Secure Test, (revised May 18, 2011).
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
State Superintendent Dr. Tommy Bice
Q. What aspects of your experiences do you think have uniquely prepared you to serve in this leadership role? A. I have been extremely blessed to have had a varied career in public education that has involved pre-K through high school, from rural to inner city, from highly resourced to austere, the list continues. What I have learned over these 30 years is that all children can learn if provided with an engaging and supported learning environment. That will be the core belief that prepares me best to serve as their voice, the voice of students, in Montgomery. Q. What was your very first order of business as state superintendent of education? A. My first order of business was to work with the state board in developing a plan of continuous improvement for our state that is based on identified need and supported by measures of attainment. Once this is in place, it will make the programmatic and budgetary decisions strategic and one that can be used to report to the citizens of our state a return on their investment. Q. What are your top priorities for improving K-12 public education in Alabama? A. In terms of priorities, I would be remiss if the Education Trust Fund budget were not pri-
A NEW ERA
Dr. Tommy Bice is involved in his first legislative session as the new state superintendent of education. He began the job earlier this year when he officially replaced Dr. Joe Morton, who retired last August. Bice has been the state Department of Education’s deputy state superintendent for instructional services. Here are his thoughts about moving forward in his new position.
About Dr. Bice: State superintendent of education; past work experience includes deputy state superintendent for instructional services, special education teacher, principal and local superintendent. Education: B.S. and Ed.D. degrees from Auburn University and M.S. degree from the University of Alabama in Birmingham; postdoctoral work at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Harvard University. Family: Wife, Nancy, and three sons, Andrew, Bennett and Cambron. Contact: 334/242-8154, tbice@alsde.edu.
mary in that listing. We all know that we will be faced with limited resources, and the new Rolling Reserve cap will add to that challenge. The state Board of Education has sent to the governor an efficient budget with a keen focus on keeping the local school systems’ Foundation Program allocation as robust as possible. At the same time, I look forward to working with our legislature to create as much flexibility for local school systems as possible to be able to create learning opportunities even in challenging economic times. Q. How do you foresee the partnership or relationship between the state Department of Education (SDE) and local boards of education working under your leadership? A. The key word here is partnership. In these economic times, it is imperative that the SDE, school boards and all of the professional organizations supporting public education work to leverage the limited resources we have. The (Continued on page 33)
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Checking in with Rep. Steve McMillan
Q. How has the Senate and House working relationship been? A. Well, there seems to be good lines of communication going, and that’s all we can ask for at this point. Q. Could you support legislation that provides more flexibility to local school boards? A. In general, certainly. Anything we can do to make life less complicated for educators and improve the work environment for the teachers and achievement of students is something I would be supportive of. I know it has to be frustrating not to have that kind of flexibility for local bodies and local boards when things are already dictated by law and the state and the low level of revenues. So, anything we can do to offer flexibility, I’m all for it. Q. Are you hopeful about the direction K12 education is headed under the new state superintendent? A. My primary opportunity to hear Dr. [Tommy] Bice’s proposals and to briefly discuss those with him was during the education summit for legislators that AASB co-hosted [in January with
POLITICAL PULSE
Alabama Rep. Stephen “Steve” McMillan serves as chairman of the House Ways and Means subcommittee for the K-12 education budget and has served in the Legislature for more than 30 years. AASB honored McMillan recently with its Legislative Award for the work he did to support the Students First Act of 2011. Read about that work and his thoughts about the 2012 legislative session in this Q&A.
About Rep. McMillan: Represents Alabama’s 95th District (Baldwin); was elected to the House of Representatives in 1980; works in real estate (McMillan & Associates); member of chambers of commerce and of the Baldwin County Legislation Committee; and chairs the House Ways and Means K-12 Appropriations Subcommittee and the County and Municipal Government Committee. Education: B.A. degree from Auburn University. Family: Wife, Gayle; two children, Scott and Jason; and five grandchildren. Contact: 251/ 948-5575, bcld07@gmail.com
School Superintendents of Alabama, Alabama Association of School Business Officials, the Council for Leaders in Alabama Schools and the Alabama Education Association]. I was very impressed, and based on what I’ve read in newspapers that have quoted him and in reading other publications from the education community, I still have high hopes that he’s going to do an excellent job and that K-12 is in good hands. Q. What are your thoughts about having elected superintendents? A. I’ve always been a supporter of appointed superintendents because I feel, since there are already enough pressures in the job, that there should be that insulation between the board and superintendent. I’ve also thought there should be an elected board at the county schools level, though having appointed boards in municipalities is OK since they are appointed by elected officials. However, to have an elected board and elected superintendent is not what we ought to
be doing in this state. Regrettably, Alabama seems to be going the other way than every other state is going since we’re among only three states that still allow the election of superintendents (Alabama, Florida and Mississippi). In this case, I don’t think that means we’re the only ones doing it right and everybody else is wrong. Q. The Legislature is expected to have to significantly cut the 2013 education budget because there won’t be as much available revenue as there was in 2012. Is the funding split between K-12 and higher education likely to come up in committee? A. Though it’s something that will be discussed, I don’t see any sentiment in Legislature right now for reducing the split between K-12 and higher education. Q. Do you support charter schools? A. I support the concept. It appears, based on discussions I’ve had, that what’s been proposed seems reasonable and fair to me, particularly limiting the focus to those schools that are persistently low-performing schools. I also think that the competition, so to speak, will be good. Education is one of the few areas in the whole country where you don’t have competition, per se. In addition, we already have charter schools in Alabama that are already working well, but they’re called something else. Mobile, for example, has a half dozen schools that operate very much like charter schools, meaning without some of the restrictions of traditional schools. These schools in Mobile have even had national attention because they are doing so well. Q. What other education issues are you watching? A. Another is the funding for education and the impact referenda have on county governing bod-
ies, which are strapped too. One of the county governments’ main concerns is having referenda they believe won’t pass and being stuck with the expense of the referenda. I suggested that they do what we did in Baldwin County last time. If the referendum passes, the school board reimburses the county governing body for the expense. That is an incentive for the school board to be fairly comfortable that the referendum is going to pass before it moves forward. We’ll just have to see how it plays out, but every level of government is hurting right now. We are also now phasing in the Education Trust Fund Rolling Reserve Act. It is working the way we knew it would, but we didn’t anticipate having no growth to offset the cap. The process works much better when there is a growing economy. If there is no growth again next year and the state has begun paying back the Rainy Day funds [borrowed to undergird the Education Trust Fund] — well, there just isn’t enough growth. Even without the new budgeting process cap, I don’t think it would have changed much because we still have to pay these constitutional Rainy Day funds back. What we’re losing presumably from the cap probably would have been lost anyway to repay these obligations, so I don’t think we can blame it on the budget process entirely. Q. Will the Legislature address the Retirement Systems of Alabama’s unfunded obligation and the level of employee contributions for health insurance? A. I don’t think there’s any doubt we are going to have to; we don’t have any choice. The retirement systems just doesn’t have the assets to meet its obligations. The issues of the retirement system’s contributions and the health insurance contributions are important. I read about Rhode Island changing its pension plan for people currently retired and currently participating in their plans. That is one of the things we’re going to do everything to avoid. We don’t want people in ed-
ucation in Alabama who are currently participating in their plans to be affected. Changes would just be for new hires. Ironically, Gov. [Fob] James wanted to do something about this problem in 1981, and had we done what he proposed then, this would all be behind us. Q. How do you feel about the new Students First Act? You were a real champion in the House and helped get it passed. A. I think it is a good law. I have heard some complaints about it being disjointed, but I think that’s a result of the process. The language doesn’t flow as smoothly, perhaps, as it could have, but there’s never been an ideal piece of legislation passed. Everything considered, we covered the most pertinent and important parts. I think a very important part of the process of passing Students First, at least in the House, was when the speaker appointed an ad hoc committee of former educators, educators, attorneys and me because of my experience serving on the previous Alabama Tenure Commission [now defunct]. He asked us to go sit down in a room and go through the bill line by line to be sure we understood the legislation and be sure that all our questions were answered. I think that contributed to a smoother passage in the House because word got around amongst the other members that somebody actually sat down and really looked at the bill and understood it and got different perspectives on it. Q. As you look back on the now-defunct state Tenure Commission, did it work? A. Gov. James appointed me to serve on the Tenure Commission, and I served for some 10 years. I had no idea what I was getting into. I’ve always been interested in education, so I thought it was something I would be interested in doing. The commission was a real committed group. High-caliber people served that
were big on improving education, policies and the quality of instruction. We had some very open and frank discussions. We did a good job at arriving at fair decisions. Q. Have you found local constituents unhappy that you supported Students First? A. There have been some misrepresentations, but no, I haven’t. Q. What would you suggest to lawmakers in working with local board members? A. Go sit in on the school board work sessions when they’re formulating their budgets. As a lawmaker, I know how things work up here and what it means to have a certain amount of money to pay for operations and maintenance and everything else, but I’m not always certain exactly how it is going to directly impact schools at the local level. I don’t want to sit there and tell them how to budget it all, but I’d like to know what impact the decisions we make up here in the statehouse will have on the local school boards. It will help everybody. Q. Do you have a message for our boards? A. Hang in there and don’t be discouraged. It’s going to be tough and may get worse before it gets better. But, it will get better. I’m the eternal optimist. I would also encourage school board members to try to understand lawmakers’ perspective. Share your perspective and the impact, but let us share our perspectives and what we’re seeing at the state level. We may know some things the school board doesn’t know. Also, if there is something that’s really outstanding or different in your school system, the local legislators certainly ought to be made aware of it.
My advocacy experience By Pam Doyle, Muscle Shoals Board of Education Alabama’s schoolchildren depend on grassroots advocates such as the members of the Alabama Association of School Boards’ Leader to Leader program to speak on their behalf. School board members are taking public education issues to the Alabama Legislature and to political leaders in their home communities. Without those willing to advocate for K-12 education, how would the needs and challenges of serving more than 740,000 students ever be addressed? One member of Leader to Leader, Pam Doyle of Muscle Shoals, decided to share her advocacy success story in hopes of encouraging others to get involved. “Hi, I’m Pam Doyle. I appreciate you for responding to my email on the legislation.” This is what I repeated to many legislators I met in the Alabama State House during legislative sessions. I received positive responses of the same nature: “You’re welcome. Glad you contacted me. Keep in touch.” For many years, chamber of commerce and business issues were priorities for my interaction with legislators. That changed one winter when state Rep. Greg Canfield spoke at an annual AASB convention about his proposed Rolling Reserve Act [codified in 2011 as The Responsible Budgeting and Spending Act]. Mr. Canfield had sponsored the bill for several years without it getting recognized on its merit. This was not just any bill. This bill was a sound approach to education budgeting that was based on previous years’ state revenues. This had the potential of making proration in Alabama practically a thing of the past. Yes, proration! Could we possibly stop the roller-coaster method of budgeting that historically resulted in giving and then taking away? It was a well-thought-out plan worth examining. Mr. Canfield graciously accepted my invitation to present the plan to the Shoals Chamber of Commerce board, Rotary Club, educators and our local elected officials in a whirlwind visit to the Shoals. Our chamber board was the first chamber in the state to pass a resolution of support for the Rolling Reserve Act and started
an internal network to lobby other chambers. The Business Council of Alabama quickly embraced the shared vision, and a strong alliance formed throughout the state. If the Rolling Reserve Act plan could eliminate the cycle of proration in Alabama, we had to do everything possible to make sure it was passed into law. Wow, this became an urgent task with no time for formalities. Emails, letters and visits asking for support were daily and weekly routines. Everyone became fair game as potential allies. I began an email and social network chain of contacts derived from the Alabama legislative guide, not caring what district they represented. If they were elected officials, they were on my list! Also, the interest, support and commitments from business groups concerning education issues were exciting. It was exhilarating to see business and education together on such crucial legislation. After all, we are educating our children to go out into the business world. What better partnership? More often than not, as I went to BCA events, regional meetings and the state house, legislators would say, “Now I can put a face with the name” or “Thank you for the information” or “I appreciate you for letting me know the other side of this issue” or “Tell me what you’re hearing about this issue.” Such responses were more the norm than the exception. Of course, there were some legislators who were not as willing to consider a new or progressive method of budgeting for any reason. However, this is pretty well true with any legislation that threatens the status quo or special interest groups that control campaign funds. I learned to never underestimate legislators’ need for current, local and other important information. In a recent legislative session, AASB Governmental Relations Director Lissa Tucker and I visited legislators on a bill successfully supported by the association. One legislator’s remarks were, “I can never support that bill,” yet he could not speak to any provisions in the bill or offer amendments — although he agreed the existing law was badly flawed. This legislator also had a special interest group’s letter on his desk and had been highlighting the group’s talking points. He looked like he had seen a ghost when he realized we were there on the opposing side of his special interest friends. What a sight!
Advocacy genies make wishes come true
PASSION for K-12 public education and a genuine desire to see all Alabama students achieve.
To advocate for public education issues, school board members need ... TO STAY INFORMED about policy, legislative and education issues and to be able to clearly articulate the local impact.
TO FOCUS on one key message and ASK the legislator to take a position on the bill after you’ve briefly explained the facts and the local impact. Be courteous. TO WALK THE TALK! Practice good governance, so you lead by example. Take every opportunity to meet with legislators in the district, at your schools and at community events. Share your local successes and challenges.
The greatest sight is yet to be seen — greater educational opportunities for our children and a more educated and trained workforce. To get there, public education and our students will need advocates. School board members have the power to make a difference in the lives of children through active advoca-
ADVOCACY TOOLS to share with legislators, such as talking points, fact sheets, testimony, emails, etc. (AASB can help).
— Infographic by Denise L. Berkhalter
cy. Advocacy is enlightening, effective and rewarding when everyone works together for a better education system for our students. I answered the call to act on behalf of children because I believe in Public Education. And, I believe the best is yet to come.
COMMON STANDARDS By Thomas Rains, A+ Education Partnership
iStockphoto.com
The economy is on everyone’s mind these days. Many of us wonder what can be done to return Alabama and the rest of the nation to prosperity. In order to just maintain Alabama’s living standard in tomorrow’s global economy, today’s students must perform at higher levels and obtain more knowledge than previous generations. Alabama’s students must be held to the highest standards, so they can compete against the top performers in their fields. Fortunately, Alabama is already implementing this high bar with its College and Career Ready Initiative, which will prepare students well, whether they choose to attend college or jump directly into a career. According to feedback from teachers and administrators in professional development networks operated by the Alabama Best Prac-
tices Center, teachers are already noticing that the new college and career ready standards require them to teach at a higher level in their classrooms. Instead of low-level memorization and basic topical understandings, the new standards push teachers to develop lessons so students learn to evaluate and analyze material and ideas. Instead of completing worksheets and answering questions at the end of each chapter in the textbook, the standards require students to read more, write more and make connections between learning and the real world. This ability to think critically equips students to obtain the best employment opportunities available. The Alabama College and Career Ready Initiative is based on the Common Core State Standards Initiative. The Alabama State Board
of Education adopted the common core in Noglobal economy. vember 2010. The Common Core provides How educators teach students to underclear, coherent and consistent standards in stand ratios, use the text to cite evidence, and English, language arts and math across grade meet the other standards is determined by local levels to allow parents and teachers to underschool systems, schools and especially teachers. stand easily what students No one understands how are expected to know. HowThe Common Core provides students learn better ever, it does not tell teachthan the teachers in the clear, coherent and consistent ers how to teach. It is not a room with them every curriculum, and it does not and the Common standards in English, language day, include lesson plans or Core respects this. (Of reading lists. The standards arts and math across grade lev- course, when it comes to simply explain what stulesson planning, good els to allow parents and teachdents should be able to do. teachers know there is no For example, a sixth-grade ers to easily understand what need to reinvent the math standard requires wheel, and new resources that students “understand students are expected to know. for teachers are already ratio concepts and use ratio appearing to help teach reasoning to solve problems.” In sixth-grade the higher standards.) reading, students should be able to “cite textual Each generation hopes its children will have evidence to support analysis of what the text greater opportunities and more success in their says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from adult lives. In this rapidly changing world, it is the text.” Additionally, the standards serve as a essential that we have world-class standards to baseline, not a ceiling, and states may add maensure that legacy continues. terial if they wish. Thomas Rains is policy director at The common core is particularly helpful for A+ Education Partnership and a families forced to move, such as the many miliformer fourth-grade teacher. The tary families in Alabama. Changing schools — A+ Education Partnership’s mission even within the same state — previously meant is to work for great schools for evethat students could end up studying material ry child — and a bright future for they had already mastered or entirely miss imAlabama. Visit www.aplusala.org. portant foundational material needed later. The common core helps solve this problem and reduces a possible source of stress for families with enough to think about already. Because of this, the Military Child Education Coalition has endorsed and strongly supports the common core standards. The National Governors Association and the If we make up a day of school — missed Council of Chief State School Officers — and due to bad weather — on a Saturday, will not the federal government — developed the overtime pay apply? Common Core State Standards Initiative after recognizing the detrimental effects of widely Probably, for some employees. Employees varying, and often low, standards across the who are eligible for overtime pay under federal country. To fix the low-standards problem, they law and work more than 40 hours during a benchmarked the common core against such work week would receive overtime pay for hours actutop academically performing countries as Sinally worked in excess of 40 hours during a work week. gapore and Japan. To date, 45 states and the Overtime pay is not required for Saturday work if the District of Columbia have adopted the Common employee does not work more than 40 hours during Core standards. This means Alabama can legitithe work week. mately benchmark the progress of its students and ensure they are prepared to excel in the
HELP
iStockphoto.com
5 By Kelley D. Carey
P
eople tire of public school issues that reflect contemporary societal problems or poor management — or both. Nothing, with the exception of school violence, upsets parents more than repeated rezoning due to demographics or overcrowding. Charter schools have become a popular alternative over the past two decades, endorsed by President Barak Obama and U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan as an innovative and viable way to boost student achievement and get children out of low-performing traditional public schools. And while there have been success stories, just as there are in traditional public schools, charters also can present real problems for school boards and districts that are struggling to make ends meet. Typically, state charter school legislation allows the diversion of local school tax money without oversight by the school board. Some charters are under district oversight, but the general aim is for separate management both at the local and state levels. Recently, the Georgia Supreme Court held that having a state commission devoted to these schools violated the state constitution, enraging charter interests. Charters do not have to take all comers, are
Boards must learn to compete for the future of education. not redistricted as demographics shift, can ease out poor learners and can manage themselves or hire a private firm. In South Carolina, for example, legislation provided that a charter’s racial makeup should reflect the district or the “targeted” area. What public school district gets to “target” the area it will serve, given what that can mean in terms of racial and socioeconomic balance? Charter schools can, despite claims of racial impartiality, with few exceptions serve mostly white students. This leaves most minority kids in regular public schools, just like faith-based academies have done for years. Charters use public tax money to run operations that traditional public schools lawfully cannot do because they must serve all who come, regardless of race, wealth or neighborhood. How can traditional schools slow this trend? As someone who has worked for more than 35 years as a school planning consultant to local, state and federal governments, I believe the an-
swer is simple, even if the issues are not. It comes down to this: Demographics, facilities and program concerns are never static, but if you don’t have a proper plan to address them, you will have problems.
Common flaws in planning What are the flaws in public schools planning that can feed this trend? Here are five: You don’t have a comprehensive long-range plan for programs, demographics and facilities. A five-year plan often is limited to preconceived notions of new buildings here and there as well as random repairs and additions. It’s easy to see why parents get fed up with yearly rezoning and changes in curriculum, grade structures and programs that come and go. With rare exceptions “progressive” student assignment plans use aging buildings to underpin a grand plan — without a longrange vision for abandoning those facilities and putting new schools in racially and economically neutral locations over time. At heart, much rezoning and construction is driven by existing old schools. Arguments about closing schools to meet declining budgets highlight a lack of ongoing planning. Planning is not using trial and error or one-shot changes but is an ongoing process driven by good management and fundamental fairness. It should not embrace this week’s gimmicks or promises by itinerant experts with no vested interest in outcomes. You don’t have strong succession plans in place. When a dynamic superintendent moves on, often no internal candidate is ready to move up, meaning that you have to go outside the district — often outside the state — to find a successor. Unless the new superintendent is willing to continue in his predecessor’s footsteps, this lack of continuity, or churn, in leadership can derail plans that are (Continued on page 23)
CHARTER CHATTER AASB weighs in on charter schools By Sally Howell, AASB Executive Director After much waiting and behind-the-scenes deliberating, a charter schools bill – Education Options Act of 2012 – has been introduced in Alabama’s 2012 legislative session. Since it’s a moving target, this column addresses the issue in a broad sense, and at this point, I can’t tell you whether AASB will ultimately support or oppose the pending bill. The very fact that we would consider supporting a charter school bill might surprise you, especially when the association successfully opposed a flawed charter bill two years ago; has read the research on charter schools’ mixed results and outcomes for students; has heard the horror stories about legal and financial battles between charter schools and traditional public schools; and has concerns that a poorly executed charter school program could be a detriment, rather than a help, to existing public schools. First, there is the practical: We believe the charter school concept in Alabama has legs, and AASB would have no ability to impact proposed legislation if we weren’t participating in the dialogue. In short, if you aren’t at the table, you are on the menu. We could have far more to lose if a bad bill passes. Second and more importantly, we in Alabama have a problem, and we need to fix it. That “we” is collective, meaning local school boards, superintendents, teachers, principals, legislators and state officials. We have failed to do all we could to proactively address the schools that are persistently underperforming. As the adage goes, if you aren’t part of the (Continued on page 24)
CHARTER CHATTER
Alabama has become a hotbed of charter school debate, nationally and statewide. To participate in the conversation, you have to tune in and listen. Here is a snapshot. — Denise Berkhalter
Tuning in to Alabama’s Charter School Debate CHARTER SCHOOLS ... x
Operate under a contract, or charter, between a public authorizing agency and a group or organization;
x
Are publicly funded public schools with open enrollment policies and no tuition;
x
Must participate in state assessments, meet federal accountability measures and meet achievement and financial standards in the charter;
x
Have a high level of regulatory freedom and autonomy from state and local rules and laws; and
x
Can be closed if they fail.
“
9
NINE STATES HAVE NO CHARTER SCHOOL LAW: A , K , M , N , N D , S D , V , V W
Many professional educators point out that nowhere have charter schools been an unqualified success and that even a pilot program would drain money from state allocations that have been slashed for four years — and will almost certainly be cut again next year. ‌ Charter schools are worth the effort if they can serve as educational laboratories. Given the freedom to innovate, they may generate strategies that then can be shared among all schools.� — Tuscaloosa News Editorial Feb. 15, 2012
“
There is actually an advantage in being 20 years behind the curve on charter schools. Namely, in playing catch-up, Alabama has a chance to do it right. ‌ How the Legislature crafts a charter school law will go a long way toward determining their success in Alabama. The biggest measure of that success must be students’ academic achievement; otherwise, why bother? ‌ Charter schools in and of themselves are not the answer to what ails Alabama schools. But they may be an answer for some school systems.� — Birmingham News Editorial Feb. 3, 2012
Alabama has 1,499 public schools serving 744,621 students. If a student leaves a traditional school and enrolls in a charter school, the state and federal public funds paying for his education follows him.
BY THE NUMBERS Q
$9,042
35% of student enrollment in Alabama is African American
’ ( , ); , $10,591
Q
3% of Alabama students are limited English proficient
Q
55% of Alabama students are economically disadvantaged
Q
11% of Alabama students have disabilities EDFacts State Trends Pro iles
Common Core of Data (CCD), 2009
$5,232 , 2010
55%
National Association of Charter School Authorizers
17%
5,600 C S U.S.
2 million S
46%
*
www.publiccharters.org Center for Public Education
37%
*
*
Center for Public Education
Center for Public Education
* Comparison based on standardized tests and considers if students had attended their neighborhood traditional public school.
2012 AASB RESOLUTION: Delegates approved a resolution that says AASB believes any state legislation to create pilot charter school programs must:
CHARTER CHATTER
x
Be approved by the local board of education;
x
Participate in the state assessment program, including publication of disaggregated test data, to determine measurable student achievement performance;
x
Be audited annually by the state Department of Examiners of Public Accounts;
x
Not exclude students due to physical or mental ability, race, ethnicity, religious preference or socio-economic background;
x
Focus on underserved student populations;
x
Include a similar pathway for the state and local school boards to innovate and obtain waivers from state law and regulations to enjoy similar flexibility as charter schools; and
x
Allow local school boards to determine accountability and retain authority to decertify or non-renew each charter or innovative school that fails to meet criteria set forth in the charter/innovative school agreement.
Should charter schools be allowed in Alabama?*
18% have no opinion 26% say no 56% say yes 56% of Alabamians are satisfied or very
12,500 K-12 JOBS Have been erased or lost since 2008
satisfied with their local public schools*
46% of Alabamians say public schools need more freedom to operate*
39% of Alabamians are satisfied or very satisfied with public schools statewide*
70% of Americans favor charter schools** The Education Trust Fund has lost $1.3 In total available funds since 2008*** * Public Affairs Research Council of Alabama, PARCA Survey 2012: Fiscal Challenges and State Government ** Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll, 2011 *** Alabama Legislative Fiscal Office, Condition of the Education Trust Fund Fiscal Years 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011
5 fixes for traditional schools Continued from page 18
in place and prevent you from moving forward. Your board does not properly involve parents. Are parents of school-age children on your board? Are meetings long and frequent, so that no working person can afford to serve? Does the board micromanage? Are parents actively involved in ongoing long-range planning for facilities, programs and student assignment? Parents should not call the shots, but they should have a voice in the process, so they can see that final decisions were informed, sound and objective. Public participation in datadriven planning leads to informed decisions and does not usurp the board’s role. Parents get some of that involvement in charter schools. Your board has members whose goal is to protect a particular area of the district, keeping schools that should be closed and overbuilding in other places. In one recent case of severe overcapacity in a district, members from the declining area all voted against closure of an old school that had to happen. They were posturing for votes. Schools are built mostly in growth areas, leaving older buildings, which are often in low-income neighborhoods, behind. Economic segregation is as dangerous as racial divides. What documented processes drive new school locations? Do you have a phase-out plan for old buildings that can’t support current programs and are black holes sucking up maintenance funds?
Commit to a rolling, realistic plan Many charter advocates cite their frustration with rezoning, leadership churn and the lack of evident planning as reasons for starting their own schools. They want their children in classrooms where parents with similar backgrounds share their values. One challenge for traditional school districts is engaging these parents so that they support the work you are doing.
In my opinion, the emerging charter school business is largely pressed by white parents and for-profit companies. The effect is that charters make equal education that much harder by removing part of the tax base from traditional public schools and changing the need for existing school buildings. Privately operated charter schools are a much more effective tool for racial and economic segregation than the old segregated school zones, simply because they are not as obviously publicly sponsored discrimination. By contrast, district-supervised charters may well serve targeted areas such as low-income housing projects and by offering enrichment programs similar to magnet schools. We cannot improve traditional public education by slicing the funding pie, with a chunk going to parents who have no interest in supporting it and a desire to use tax money to invent their own programs in locations that further divide communities along racial and economic lines. At the same time, the notion of, “Do it my way, or I am starting my own school” — however self-seeking — may have some root in the desire for better schools management. Boards should commit to a rolling five-year planning process, instead of changing grade structures and repeatedly rezoning to handle enrollment changes that were foreseeable. And trying the latest program models without the context of a five-year plan just begs for the loss of public support. The plan must be updated each year. We cannot get public support with a business model that only plans when things have gotten out of hand. Boards must learn to compete for the future of education. Parents leaving for charter schools are not all anti-public education, anti-social or driven by religion. They do want attendance stability, relevant education, less politics, less board infighting and more beneficial program development instead of change for the sake of change. But, doesn’t meeting such concerns reflect a well-run school district anyway? Reprinted with permission from American School Board Journal, February 2012. Copyright 2012 National School Boards Association. All rights reserved.
AASB weighs in on charter schools Continued from page 19
x
Traditional public schools are given the same latitude to innovate as charters. There should be a level playing field. School boards should have the option to request waivers from select state laws.
x
School boards determine which charters are granted, if any. All charters should be presented first to the local school board. If the school board denies the charter, an appeal should be limited to applications targeted to the student population of a persistently low-performing school.
x
Charters are limited in number. A definite limit – perhaps 30 to 40 — should be set, so data can be collected to determine if this new education tool actually works.
x
Charters are limited in scope. Any charter effort outside of one implemented by a school board needs to target student performance that is persistently low. In a state that spends less per child than most others in the nation, we need to preserve precious resources. Schools that are already getting good results should not be targeted.
x
The technical aspects of the bill involving funding and rights need to be
iStockphoto.com
solution, you are part of the problem. We need every child in this state to be college and career ready. This isn’t philosophy but an economic necessity if we want to enjoy the same standard of living that we enjoy right now. We need new tools and new thinking to reach every child in a dramatically changing world. Not all those changes are good, but we can’t deny the world around us is transforming. We have to adapt and leverage those changes to our benefit as opposed to clinging to the status quo. The charter concept essentially is about flexibility at the local and system level. This is another tool to help educators better meet student needs. And, flexibility is a tool every school should have. These points have led us to the conclusion that school boards could support charter schools within these parameters:
balanced in the interests of all students and with respect to prior commitments made. Whatever funding formula is used, it should reflect financial realities, such as: special education costs cannot be passed through to the local school board; local funds already pledged for capital outlay or other specified uses cannot be considered; and the impact of the 10-mill match has to be proportionately considered. x
Charter schools are required to participate in the same academic and financial accountability standards as public schools and are truly open to all students.
x
Charter schools are required to participate in the Public Education Employees’ Health Insurance Plan and the Teachers’ Retirement System. We have to honor our commitment to employees and can’t do so by undermining the financial integrity of PEEHIP and TRS if charter school employees are able to opt out of them.
x
Potential legal problems are addressed cost effectively. The state Department of Education should settle financial and legal disputes, and litigation should not be an option. Also, each charter school must be a separate legal entity that posts performance bonds, so taxpayers don’t foot the bill if the school is not successful.
While we’re disappointed the draft doesn’t more closely reflect the months of discussions aimed at getting a bill we could support, AASB remains resolved to work toward providing school boards with more flexibility to innovate, including the option of having charter schools to target students with the greatest needs.
sharing By Del Stover
T
he growth of charters is forcing school boards to confront a host of policy issues with significant and long -term implications for districts Detroit school board President Tyrone Winfrey isn’t entirely happy to be authorizing charter schools in a city already beleaguered with declining enrollment and shrinking financial resources. But he also doesn’t see much benefit to his board opposing the momentum of today’s charter movement. “When I initially got on the school board, I was not a charter school fan,” he says. “But if we’re going to have charter schools, let the Detroit Public Schools be the authorizing body, and that way, we can set some parameters for charter school providers ... and talk about what we want and keep some consistency [in practices] with the schools already in the district.” Such a pragmatic response to the charter movement is voiced repeatedly by urban school boards nationwide. This fall, Boston’s school board — with a nudge from the city’s mayor — agreed to a major policy shift in its cooperation with surrounding charters. Los Angeles’ board has invited outside groups to take over existing
iStockphoto.com
troubled schools as charter startups. In Baltimore, Denver, Nashville and New York City, for instance, school leaders increasingly are working toward closer ties with charters and incorporating them into what educators today call a “portfolio” of school choices available to families. Such efforts haven’t always gone smoothly, and depending on the city, the attitude of school officials toward this policy direction has ranged from enthusiastic to resigned. But their underlying experience is the same: The growth of charters is forcing school boards to confront a host of policy issues with significant and long-term implications for their districts. What, many ask, will be the financial impact on district budgets as more charters open? What will happen to underutilized buildings if enrollment declines continue? Should districts offer professional development and curriculum support to ensure that charters have quality instruction? How can school boards prevent charters from screening out English language learners (ELLs) and special education students? “It’s going to be tough,” Winfrey says of the years ahead. “We’re going to have to accept that
Charter schools now account for 5% of the nation’s public schools — and enroll more than 2 million schoolchildren. Those numbers will only rise.
our policymaking will be affected.”
Growing enthusiasm That reality is going to be experienced by more and more urban school boards in the years ahead. More than 500 new charter schools opened in 2011-12, a 7 percent increase that puts the national total at about 5,600 schools, according to the National Alliance for Public School Charters. Put another way: Charter schools now account for 5 percent of the nation’s public schools and enroll more than 2 million schoolchildren. Those numbers will only rise. This year, several states — including Indiana, North Carolina and Tennessee — lifted caps on the number of schools that can be chartered. This fall, the U.S. House approved a $350 million package to help charter startups, while philanthropic organizations have awarded tens of millions of dollars to support their expansion across the nation. Such policy decisions at the state and federal levels underscore the fundamental shift in political and public opinion in the past decade. The federal Empowering Parents Through Quality Charter Schools Act, which has been referred to a committee in the U.S. Senate, points to the growing bipartisan support for charters, passing the House by a 300-82 margin. And the 2011 Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll found approval ratings for charters has continued to grow, with 70 percent of Americans favoring them — up from 60 percent four years ago. Not surprisingly, the attitudes of local school board members have shifted as well. Although many remain leery of the financial impact of charters — and concerned about weak accountability — “the whole tenor of conversation is different,” says Robin Lake, associate director of the University of Washington’s Center on Reinventing Public Education.
CHARTER CHATTER
Today, she says, in nearly a dozen cities, from Boston to Sacramento, Calif., school boards and charter school providers are sitting down to develop new ground rules for working together — more as partners than as rivals. “It’s not all fun. There are still differences,” she says. “But it’s exciting to see people working out new arrangements about sharing resources and sharing responsibility for special needs students, and addressing the issues of lowperforming schools.”
Question of authority As optimistic as that sounds, the reality is that school boards nationwide are dealing with entirely different situations and relationships regarding charters. Much depends on state laws. For example, the more authority local school boards have over charters, the greater the likelihood that board members are willing to view them favorably — and to see opportunities to work collaboratively. One of the more collaborative efforts under way these days is in Baltimore City Schools, where state policy puts the authority for chartering schools directly in the hands of the local board. Board member David Stone says local officials see charters as a useful tool, and the board has authorized 34 over the years. Coupled with the city’s specialty schools for math, science and other programming, charters add to the variety — the portfolio — of school choices the board is creating for the city’s families. Stone, a charter supporter, says the state law putting them under the board’s authority is key to Baltimore’s successful model. “I don’t support multiple authorizers,” he says. “There can be only one voice for the Baltimore City Schools, one body that is empowered to work with the superintendent and make decisions ... to be the collective voice of the community about what their schools should look like and how resources should be distributed.”
Even with such authority, school boards must be committed to a successful collaborative relationship. More than a few communities have seen charters kept at arm’s length by hostile boards. But Baltimore’s board has made a conscious decision to develop a relationship that allows district officials to influence charter policies on instruction, discipline and labor agreements. They even seek out charter groups to provide unique educational opportunities or services targeting specific, traditionally underserved student populations. The relationship is constantly evolving, Stone says. Charters and the district office have collaborated on professional development and student transportation. The district has given charters the opportunity to use its vacant or underutilized buildings. In some cases, charter providers have received help from the school system to borrow money at a lower cost, and a joint committee of district and charter officials meets regularly to coordinate efforts on issues related to funding, instruction and policy.
Challenges abound Such collaboration is not easy, and no one knows that better than board members in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). Over the years, several charters have run afoul of allegations of test cheating, embezzlement or fiscal mismanagement, and the board has closed several despite parent opposition. The board also has adopted new rules to tighten its oversight of these independently operated schools, and today at least 20 employees coordinate the district’s oversight of more than 200 charters. Yet, as this number has increased, the school board also has made repeated efforts to improve coordination. Last December, the board and 112 charter operators signed a new Quality Schools Compact, pledging to strengthen accountability measures, improve charter services to ELLs and work closer on other instructional issues. In another agreement, LAUSD agreed to turn over millions in state funding for special education services, a decision designed both to boost charter enrollment of students with disabilities and give the district more influence over their use of expensive outside service providers. Meanwhile, Boston’s board recently agreed
to a new compact with 14 charter schools in the city, an assignment that should lead to joint teacher training and recruitment efforts, closer ties on analyzing student performance data and the creation of a common accountability instrument. Board members also agreed to explore leasing vacant and underutilized buildings to charter providers, who in turn agreed to focus more on outreach and services to special education and ELL students. According to the Boston Globe, “The compact represents a truce between the city and the charter schools after years of acrimony that dates back to when the charter schools first began opening.” Such efforts should not suggest that school boards everywhere are ready to embrace charters. That’s especially true where state laws essentially allow charters to proliferate as rivals for students and funding. In Ohio, for example, school boards chafe under a state mandate to provide transportation for charter students and, despite recent efforts at change, the state’s lackluster history at holding charters accountable for their poor academic performance. Similar complaints have been aired in Arkansas and Arizona, where state policy has turned public and charter schools into rivals over students and state aid.
The die is cast Striving to strike a balance in this situation is the Milwaukee school board. On one hand, says board member Terry Falk, school officials are very sensitive to the fact that the city council and a local university also are empowered to authorize charters. That puts the pressure on board members when they’re approached to sign off on a new school. “You have to worry about things like market share,” he says. “If someone comes to us and says we want to start a school, and if you don’t charter us, we’ll go to the city or University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and get the charter, that puts greater pressure on us, because the money flows through those entities rather than the school system.” To its credit, however, the board has become far more discriminating in its approval of charters and closing of failing schools, he says.
Searching for your next ...
Have a Chief School Financial Officer or Superintendent vacancy? Allow the Alabama Association of School Boards to help you fill these key positions with skilled, experienced talent.
CSFO VACANCIES - kroberts@AlabamaSchoolBoards.org SUPERINTENDENT VACANCIES - ssalter@AlabamaSchoolBoards.org iStockphoto.com
800/562-0601 or 334/277-9700
“We’re much more careful about looking under all the rocks than 10 years ago.” In Camden, N.J., however, school board members can do little but speak out, as state officials have total authority over charters. Today, the district has nearly 3,000 students attending charters in the city, and plans for even more charters have been announced. Some board members see such growth as a threat to the district, but board member Barbara Coscarello holds a different view. She sees charters as a natural outgrowth of the public’s concerns about academic failings in the city — and a desire among families to have more options. “There’s a general feeling that this is not good for urban communities, but I look on it differently,” she says. “I view it in terms of a business model. When a business is not meeting the requirements of the marketplace, another business is going to come to the forefront to fill that gap, and that is what we have with charter schools.” Certainly, many political leaders in New Jer-
sey share that opinion. Earlier this year, state lawmakers supported legislation to raise the cap on charter schools. To arguments that this will hurt the district — drawing away its best students and siphoning away state aid — Coscarello says major changes to the city schools aren’t necessarily bad policy. If anything, she says, it could force an important re-examination of student needs in the traditional schools and a renewed policy debate about how to serve children who have been served poorly. And, in the end, she says, there’s no other recourse but to accept what’s coming. “Charter schools are not going away,” she says. “I think the public likes clear choices. We’ve heard from the people — this is what they want.” Reprinted with permission from American School Board Journal, February 2012. Copyright 2012 National School Boards Association. All rights reserved.
DISTRICT DIRECTOR’S PERSPECTIVE By Stephanie Walker, AASB District 1 Director
Maybe you’ve noticed. Newspapers are actively searching for headlines to sell papers. Education stories fill that need, and the media are capitalizing on drama that hits close to home because families and business leaders are passionate about what happens to their children and their communities. Maybe you’ve seen stories about school boards involved in verbal squabbles more likely to be seen on elementary playgrounds. It’s possible you’ve seen articles about boards making decisions in a hurry or without all the information or from a personal bias. You just know you don’t want to be a member of that board or to open yourself up to public ridicule. When you joined the board, you wanted what every board member wants — to advance public education for all our children. Yet improper, uninformed, inappropriate decision-making by the board does just the opposite of that, threatening our collective credibility and lowering community confidence in public education. Those headlines also cast a shadow on the continued viability of the institution of the school board itself. Just how real the threat to school boards’ continued existence is can be seen in the aggressive stance being taken by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools and its parent organization, AdvancED. In the last year, at least nine school systems in the South have had their accreditation status changed to “probation” or “warned” because of what SACS officials determined was board misbehavior. In some cases, the behavior was outright micromanagement. In others, it was a failure to act ethically or responsibly. In recent weeks, an Alabama board had its accreditation status changed to “warned.” In Georgia, lawmakers passed a law allowing an entire school board to be removed from office if the system loses its accreditation due to board micromanagement. So, what can board members in Alabama do to avoid being the next headline? Resolve to raise the bar for ourselves, just as we raise the bar for our children. Become an effective school board member! A group of Alabama school board members and superintendents spent the last year pondering just what it means to be an effective school
board and school board member. We looked at the research. We looked at the expectations school boards here and in other states have set for themselves. We talked about what it is that we, as the public’s voice in public education, should expect of ourselves and what behaviors are most likely to result in a high functioning board-superintendent governance team. The result of that work is the development of 6 Standards for School Boards. These standards lay out the performance expectations to which boards and board members should aspire. They are practical and straightforward. Taskforce members wanted them to be simple and easy to remember. They also wanted standards to focus on school boards’ core responsibilities, raise the performance of boards, lead to continuous improvement and be usable in school board retreats or the self-evaluation process. These standards will guide AASB School Board Member Academy training, and there has been preliminary discussion of creating a program of distinction that honors boards that consistently operate in compliance with all six standards. As an organization, AASB has always been strong because we – the members – have expected a lot of ourselves. We haven’t expected AASB to defend the indefensible. We have embraced the concept of mandatory training for board members, have participated in exceedingly high levels in AASB’s academy and have aspired to raising the standards for eligibility for board service. Those positions have contributed to the strengths of our school systems and the credibility of our organization. These six standards are not rocket science, but they are also not “Candyland.” Their implementation will require real effort on the part of each school board member and each school board. That may sound like a tall order, but isn’t that what we’re asking of our schoolchildren every day? We want your best work. We need your full attention. We value your every effort. Our goal is to achieve at the highest level. Let’s show our students that we’re in this together. To start, allow me to provide you with a general overview of the standards. A standards board ...
Operates as a visionary, ethical governance team. Your team must set the vision for the school system by answering the question, “What do we want for the children of our community?” To determine that, your board should work with the superintendent, staff and community to generate ideas and input. That vision then becomes the basis for the board’s decision making and its efforts to support the staff who must implement the vision. Standards boards ...
x Setting expectations for the quality of the staff
the system will employ. This might mean discussing with the superintendent the need for a recruiting program to attract better trained or more experienced teachers or even a more diverse workforce. The board wouldn’t design the program but would be responsible for adequately funding it. x Setting high expectations for student and staff
professional development, staffing, etc.) to accomplish the system goals;
performance. While evaluation is clearly the superintendent’s domain, your board should set the expectation that students will receive a year’s worth of learning gains for a year’s worth of seat time – and reinforce that expectation through regular communication with and the evaluation of the superintendent.
x Review data regularly to ensure progress is be-
x Using data to make decisions. Your board may
x Set clear, measurable goals for the system and
for the board; x Provide system resources (funding, programs,
ing made; and x Hold the superintendent accountable for accom-
plishing the system’s goals and the board accountable for reaching its own improvement goals. Just as importantly, the second element of Standard 1 focuses on behaving ethically. Sounds easy, but this is where many boards misstep. To be a standards board, you should:
want to review achievement test scores, a comparison of achievement data resulting from two comparable programs (such as reading programs), survey data on student/parent satisfaction or teacher morale – the list is endless. Using data relentlessly, over a longer period of time, ensures your decisions are based on facts, not fads.
influence) personnel actions involving family or friends;
Creates local policy in compliance with state and federal law. Complying with this standard goes beyond just keeping the policy manual current – though that is part of it. Your board should:
x Police your own (and your colleagues’) behav-
x Learn about the laws that impact education
x Fiercely avoid micromanagement; x Abstain from voting on (or even attempting to
ior; and x Respect the chain of command by taking issues
and complaints directly to the superintendent. Focuses on student achievement. Think back on your meetings over the last year. How many of those meetings involved substantive discussions regarding student achievement or obstacles to learning? Without a planned, deliberate effort, it is easy to get distracted from our most important work. Consider: x Using a planning calendar to ensure specific
data is discussed when it becomes available or to establish a regular schedule for reviewing specific program results. This helps you celebrate successes, identify challenges and evaluate whether you’re on track to meet your goals.
and education governance; x Use your board attorney when needed; x Learn the difference between policy (the
board’s job) and procedure (the superintendent’s realm) and commit to staying in the board’s lane; and x Help the public understand the board’s role as
compared to the chief executive’s. Acts with fiscal responsibility. This standard sets expectations for your board that run the gamut from knowledge to courage. At the most basic level, Standard 4 expects your board will choose a chief school financial officer with the skill and ability to guide you and keep your system in the black. Likewise, both the board and superintendent should regularly evaluate the CSFO’s performance and work together to set performance goals.
Also at the basic level, the standard anticipates that boards will tie spending to the accomplishment of agreed-upon goals, monitor the system’s financial health and communicate about the financial status regularly. On a more advanced level, boards that meet this standard must have the self-discipline to plan for unforeseen financial situations. This could vary from having enough insurance to replace a building wiped out by a tornado to having enough funds in reserve to meet operating expenses if the state suddenly can’t meet its obligations to you. Perhaps the most challenging part of meeting this standard involves trusting your superintendent and CSFO enough to seriously consider and accept their recommendations to make deep spending cuts in times of financial strife. This is often an area where school boards struggle, in no small part because of the desire to protect employees’ jobs or for fear of political repercussions. However, this standard sets the expectation that board members will commit to taking actions that protect the financial health and viability of the school system. Selects (if the superintendent is appointed) and supports an effective superintendent. You could say the success of all the other standards is predicated on achieving Standard 5. Board members and the superintendent must recognize that respect and trust are crucial to achieving a healthy exchange of ideas and information. Open, honest communication lays the framework for a knowledgeable board that understands how to support an effective superintendent. Without that, the progress of most school systems grinds inexorably and painfully to a halt. That doesn’t mean boards look the other way when problems arise or that there is never disagreement. On the contrary, that means boards with an eye on the standards have the vision and the willingness to meet challenges in ways that maintain the dignity of public education and meet the needs of students.
Advocates for public education. Your board’s attention to this role of advocate can do much to advance the vision of your system. Think of yourself as the ‘listening wall’ as well as the visible billboard for your system. Listen attentively to your stakeholders (parents, community residents, political officials and others), while keeping them informed about successes and challenges and encouraging their valuable support.
How We Got Here The Six Standards for School Boards were developed by a task force of Alabama school board members and superintendents. They were drawn largely from the membership of AASB’s Academy Advisory Committee, which is specifically charged with helping AASB identify the training needs of its members. The Standards Task Force was chaired by Stephanie Walker, a 16-year veteran of the Brewton Board of Education and AASB District 1 director. AASB President Steve Foster served as the task force vice chairman. Foster has been a member of the Lowndes County school board for 20 years. Also serving on the task force were: Florence Bellamy, AASB immediate past president and a member of the Phenix City school board for 23 years; Jimmy Dobbs, a member of the Morgan County school board for 12 years; Jeffery Finch, who has served on the Chambers County board for six years; Dr. Mary Harrington, a member of the Anniston school board since 2008; Dr. Jan Harris, superintendent of the Cullman school board since 2005; Rubin McKinnon, a member of the Coffee County school board for 24 years; Dr. Steve Nowlin, superintendent of the Lee County school board since 2007; James Pounds, who at the time was completing a five-year term on the Vestavia Hills board; Mary Stowe, a member of the Madison County school board for eight years; and Larry Teel, a member of the Elmore County school board for 22 years. Go to www.AlabamaSchoolBoards.org for the full list of standards.
BALANCED SCORECARD The Alabama Association of School Boards’ mission is to develop excellent school board leaders through quality training, advocacy and services. AASB made progress toward accomplishing that mission in 2011. Below are a few highlights. Performance
Focus
Measure
Field Services
Training/Services
Number of services conducted with local boards in their districts: 41
Academy Courses
Training
Total academy year attendance at 4 major conferences: 1,315 in FY2011 (1,268 in FY2010) Total academy year registrants for district meetings: 1,091 in FY2011 (1,019 in FY2010) Total academy year attendance for new board member orientation: 205 Academy year achievement levels reached: 60 at Level 1; 25 at Level 2; 27 at Level 3; 22 at Level 4; 2 at Levels 1 & 2; 5 at Levels 2 & 3; 24 first-time Master level; 52 at Master level for multiple years; 41 on Masters Honor Roll
Webinars & Workshops
Training
Total participation codes used/CDs distributed: 606 Total registrants for Board Secretaries Workshop: 20
Advocacy
Advocacy
Number in AASB advocacy groups: 72 school board members participated in Leader to Leader and 26 school board members served as Congressional Contacts
Rolling Reserve Act
Advocacy
In the 2011 Legislative Session, AASB saw education funding and proration addressed with the enactment of the Rolling Reserve Act (Act 2011-03)
Students First Act
Advocacy
In 2011, the Legislature enacted Students First (Act 2011-270) in a landmark vote that injected common sense in public school personnel law and restored the local school board’s role in personnel decisions
Advocacy Initiatives
Advocacy
Governmental relations director served as liaison to state Board of Education. AASB worked to educate boards about the state’s high-quality prekindergarten program
Membership
Leaders
Percent membership of Alabama school boards: 100% Number of Professional Sustaining Members by level: 3 Premier Partners, 1 Platinum PSM, 7 Silver PSMs, 12 Bronze PSMs and 16 Basic PSMs Total membership of Alabama Council of School Board Attorneys: 109
Medicaid Administrative Claiming & Fee for Service
Services
Alabama Risk Management for Schools
Services
Website & social media
Services
Total disbursement to school systems (May 2010-August 2011): $25 million Total participating systems (Oct. 1, 2010-Sept. 30, 2011): General Liability Errors & Omissions Liability - 134 and Automobile Liability - 32 Total number of website hits: 1.2 million (quarterly average, 302,968) Availability of on-demand information through technology (as of June 2011): 247 Facebook fans, 174 Twitter followers, 2 listservs, 1 RSS feed, al.com education page and a BoardCast smartphone app
Publications
Services
Number of regular publications produced during 2011 calendar year: 3 magazines and 37 editions of AASB newsletters (including Court Report, Advocate for Schools and For Your Information)
AT THE TABLE
Gwendolyn Harris Brooks School board Lanett City Board of Education Hometown Lanett Been a school board member for 11 years Books at bedside Bible, The Purpose Driven Life by Rick Warren and Quiet Strength by Tony Dungy Inspiration As a board member and a servant of this community, I am inspired by a well-oiled education machine. It truly does take a village to educate our children. We must all play our part in helping our children be the best they can be. A welloiled education machine includes eager students, concerned parents, committed teachers and staff, well-trained administrators and caring and knowledgeable board members. Motto as board member Believe, Achieve and Receive a quality education. Walter Mitty fantasy I would love to be a genie. I could snap my fingers and we would have the funds for pre-K classes and also be able to send students to our local technical school and prepare them for the future. Greatest accomplishment as a board member Starting the school uniform program and working with the board to get the staff and administrators in place that are concerned, caring and dedicated to the success of this school system as a whole. Pet peeve as a board member I just hope we continue to increase test scores, the graduation rate and make parents more knowledgeable about technical education. Reason I like being an AASB member The training that we receive from AASB helps us to be able to perform the duties our citizens expect us to do. The networking with fellow board members and sharing success stories is a powerful tool for change. My epitaph “If I have helped somebody as I passed along, if I have cheered somebody with words or song, if I have showed somebody that he/she was traveling wrong, then my living has not been in vain.”
State Superintendent Continued from page 10
worst thing that could happen at this fragile juncture is for us to splinter into disparate entities with conflicting agendas. I have committed to the leadership of each group to be a part of the teambuilding effort. Q. What do you see on the horizon for K-12 public education in the legislative arena and in the congressional arena? A. I am pleased with introductory meetings with the legislative leadership and welcome their desire for greater and more meaningful accountability. My hope is that they will look to the SDE, our local school systems’ leadership and our education partners for guidance on education issues, so their decisions can be informed by fact and research. I feel confident that will be the case. As for Congress, our congressional delegation has met with us and understands our challenges and is very committed to seeing Alabama fully represented in Washington, D.C. Regrettably, the impasse that appears to be the norm in Congress will be difficult for even our well-intentioned and committed delegation to traverse. I can only hope that at some point that impasse will be replaced with a working relationship that supports public education and a removal of the many and negatively impacting rules and regulations imposed from the U.S. Department of Education.
Cullman city hosts technology visit By Denise L. Berkhalter Each beat commands the heart to inflate and deflate as it delivers lifeblood to every cell in the human body. Spin the heart around for a closer look at each chamber, the aorta, the awesome construction. This three-dimensional splendor is what students in Cullman City Schools may one day enjoy as they learn about heart anatomy. Wallace State Community College and its partners are working on a grant-funded project to develop 3D and 4D learning objects meant to better engage a generation of students practically born with digital devices in their hands. A two-week Educator in Residence Program will expose K-12 faculty to the latest simulation-based learning technologies used to develop 3D and 4D learning objects. Students will be able to view, touch, hear, interact with and sense reactions to digital objects in real time. Educators will receive a stipend of $500 per week to participate. Wallace State and Cullman City Schools demonstrated the cutting-edge technology to more than 40 educators from as nearby as Jefferson County to as far away as Nova Scotia, Canada. The Feb. 29 -March 2 showcase was part of the National School Boards Association’s 2012 Education Technology Site Visits. Cullman is one of only four sites chosen for this year’s visits and the only one in Alabama. The event highlighted the state’s distance learning program and reading initiative. There were school tours that showed off the system’s laptop initiative, digital piano lab, project-based learning program and use of technology in physical education and with English language learners. “Through NSBA’s technology site visits, school leaders are able to see education technology innovation in action and develop their own successful initiatives,” said Ann Flynn, NSBA’s director of education technology. “This is a great opportunity for school leaders to witness classrooms where curriculum goals drive technology decisions.” Flynn took off her 3D glasses and shared just how impressed she was with the visit to a school system that serves 3,000 students in five schools in downhome Alabama. It was the first time, she said, that multi-dimensional teaching tools had been shown at a technology site visit. “This is not just about the wow factor,” she said.
Educators view a demonstration of 3D learning objects during a Technology Leadership Network site visit at Cullman City Schools on March 2. (AASB Photo/Denise L. Berkhalter)
“We all learn in 3D. This comes naturally to students, so think how useful it would be for them to identify, label, rotate and mouse over the skeleton or heart when they’re learning human anatomy. This engages them in the content, and when learners are engaged, they retain the content better.” Flynn also said Cullman proves successful integration of technology in education is about the “people, not the stuff.” Kenneth Griswold, the instructional technology specialist for Tupelo Public Schools in Mississippi, agreed. “We’ve seen clear evidence of where they’ve built capacity among the principals, teachers, students and community and developed a culture of support for technology,” he said. Gregg MacKinnon of Canada’s Halifax Regional School System said his schools are in year one of a one-to-one laptop initiative for students. Cullman is in year six and served as proof to him “that we’re on the right track.” For MacKinnon, the “best moment, being a principal, was a conversation I had with a student about how beneficial this has been.” Cullman Superintendent Dr. Jan Harris wrapped the visit up after using a bit of technology herself to dismiss school early in anticipation of stormy weather. She was happy to hear that the culture of support for technology in Cullman shone through. “We spent a whole year getting stakeholder support. You know, my job is to provide the vision, but then I have to go out there and sell it, “ Harris said. “Our teachers want to learn new methods of instruction, and our principals want to lead. They need to know that we value their ideas and want them engaged in the process, so we can walk together toward the future.”
Alabama Association of School Boards
A Partnership That Works!
• Volkert & Associates, Inc. Mobile, AL • 251/342-1070
• eBOARDsolutions, Inc. Lawrenceville, GA • 770/822-3626
• High Ground Solutions-SchoolCast Birmingham, AL • 205/988-5884
• AdvancedED-Alabama SACS CASI Montgomery, AL • 334/244-3163 • Barganier Davis Sims Architects Associated Montgomery, AL • 334/834-2038 • Davis Architects Inc. Birmingham, AL • 205/322-7482 • Evan Terry Associates, P.C. Birmingham, AL • 205/972-9100
• American Fidelity Assurance Birmingham, AL • 205/987-0950
• Hecht Burdeshaw Architects Opelika, AL • 334/826-8448 • Information Transport Solutions Wetumpka, AL • 334/567-1993 • JBHM Education Group Jackson, MS • 601/987-9187
• Ellis Architects Tuscaloosa, AL • 205/752-4420
• Krebs Architecture & Engineering Birmingham, AL 35244 • 205/987-7411
• Goodwyn Mills & Cawood, Inc. Montgomery, AL • 334/271-3200
• PH&J Architects, Inc. Montgomery, AL • 334/265-8781
• McKee & Associates Montgomery, AL • 334/834-9933
• Schneider Electric Birmingham, AL • 205/356-3646
• R.K. Redding Construction/ Planning Services Bremen, GA • 770/537-1845
• Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. Pelham, AL • 205/213-5162
• Synergetics DCS Starkville, MS 39759 • 662/461-0122
• Southland International Bus Sales Birmingham, AL • 888/844-1821
• TCU Consulting Services, LLC Montgomery, AL • 334/420-1500
• Alabama Beverage Association Montgomery, AL • Alabama Supercomputer Authority Montgomery, AL • 334/242-0100 • Energy Systems Group Helena, AL • 205/994-0490 • Hoar Program Management Birmingham, AL • 205/803-2121 • Kelly Services Dothan, AL • 334/673-7136 • KHAFRA Engineers and Architects Birmingham, AL • 205/252-8353 • Lathan Associates Architects, P.C. Hoover, AL • 205/988-9112 • Payne Lee & Associates Montgomery, AL • 334/272-2180 • Ra-Lin and Associates, Inc. Carrollton, GA 770/834-4884 • SRJ Architects, Inc. Albany, GA • 229/436-9877 • Terracon Birmingham, AL • 205/942-1289 • Transportation South Pelham, AL • 205/663-2287 • WSV Architects, Inc. Tuscaloosa, AL • 205/345-6110
Alabama Association of School Boards Post Office Drawer 230488 Montgomery, Alabama 36123-0488
Non-profit Org. U.S. Postage PAID Montgomery, AL Permit No. 34