Instead of accrediting entire school districts, as the state does now, accreditation would be done at the individual school building level. The building classifications would be the same as those for districts: Accredited with distinction, accredited, provisionally accredited and unaccredited, depending on scores on DESE’s annual performance report.
No district could be classified as unaccredited unless at least 55 percent of its schools are unaccredited.
Individual school buildings in underperforming districts would be classified separately from their district, using the present categories of accredited with distinction, accredited, provisionally accredited and unaccredited. The classifications would be made based on three years’ worth of data.
The proportion of a school’s buildings that remain accredited would be a factor in considering whether a district remains accredited and how it would be governed.
Students attending an unaccredited school could first transfer to an accredited school in their home district; districts would have to adopt policies giving priority to lowest-achieving students from low-income families for such transfers. In any case, transfers could not result in class sizes exceeding DESE standards.
If such an intradistrict transfer is unavailable, students could transfer from an unaccredited school to an accredited one in an accredited district in the same or an adjoining county. Students would have to have lived in the unaccredited district for at least 12 months.
Districts could establish policies for class sizes and student-teacher ratios and would not have to accept any transfers that violate those policies. By Jan. 1 of each year, accredited district would report the number of available spaces by grade level. Parents who want their children to transfer would have to file a notification by March 1 of each year.
Schools and districts that are provisionally accredited, unaccredited or scoring 75 percent or less on their annual performance reports could not accept transfer students.
Students in unaccredited school buildings would be allowed to transfer if they have lived in the district for the previous 12 months. Their first choice must be accredited buildings in their home district; if those buildings are full, they would be allowed to transfer to accredited districts that have space available.
Receiving districts would be allowed to establish limits on class size and student-teacher ratios, and they would not be required to accept transfer students that would violate those numbers.
A student’s home district would pay tuition for any transfers. But the receiving district could charge less tuition than it would normally charge, and if the total is 30 percent less than its normal tuition, assessment scores and other performance data of transfer students would not count in its annual report for five school years.
If a receiving district charged a tuition that is less than 90 percent of its normal rate, 10 percent of the tuition would be paid by a newly created supplemental tuition fund.
Effective immediately, to apply to students who have transferred from Normandy and Riverview Gardens in the current school year, tuition would be capped at 70 percent of the receiving districts’ rate. An additional 5 percent would be placed into a transportation fund that would pay for students to go from their homes to their new districts.
This provision could lead to receiving districts refunding to Normandy and Riverview Gardens part of the money that has been paid for tuition thus far, easing those districts’ financial concerns.
The state board of education may appoint members of an elected school board to serve on a special administrative board, but elected board members could only make up less than half of such an appointed board.
If the state board feels a local district will not be able to provide education for students because of financial problems, it may impose conditions on the elected board or may lapse the district and put into place any of several alternative governance structures.
Special assistance teams would be assigned by the state board of education to districts whose performance is judged as “provisional or borderline.” The teams would be made up of at least 10 members, including two district teachers, two principals and one parent.
Starting with the 2014-15 school year, such teams would make recommendations for improvement no later than June 30, 2015, with districts that have the lowest performance scores being given the highest priority for attention and intervention.
To help deal with struggling schools, the state would have three separate regional education authorities, one each to monitor districts in St. Louis and St. Louis County, Jackson County including Kansas City and the rest of the state. Each authority would be governed by a three-member panel who might live in the covered area, be appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate.
The authorities would coordinate student transfers, working with local districts and local governments.
As of Jan. 1, 2015, a new entity known as the “statewide achievement school district” would be established to monitor underperforming schools in unaccredited districts. It would be governed by a three-member board to be chosen from the governor, with input from the speaker of the House and the president pro tem of the Senate and confirmation by the Senate.
The achievement district would have broad powers over operations, facilities, staff and other aspects of the struggling schools, using money from the schools’ home districts.
Schools could remain in the special district for no longer than five years. At that point, they would either revert to their original district, if they have shown sufficient improvement, or face possible closure.
Students enrolled in an unaccredited public school may transfer to a nonsectarian private school located in their district, with their home district paying the tuition. But such transfers could only occur if students were unable to transfer to an accredited school in their home district and have lived in their home district for at least 12 months.
The tuition for such students could be paid only with money from the local tax levy for operating funds.
To accept a transfer students under these conditions, a nonsectarian private school must be accredited or demonstrate academic quality credentials, administer statewide assessments in English and math and comply with health and safety codes.
Students unable to find space to transfer to an accredited school within their home district or a school in a nearby accredited district may transfer to a nonsectarian private school.
Tuition paid for such a transfer could not be more than the lesser of: the receiving private school’s tuition, or 70 percent of the nonresident tuition rate for the public school district in which the private school is located. Tuition money would come from the home district’s operating tax levy.
The private school must be accredited and have been operating continuously for at least three years.
The reading proficiency of students in the St. Louis and Kansas City public school districts, including those in charter schools, would be assessed on a regular basis, with particular attention to the early grades.
Students not reading at grade level by the end of second grade could be promoted only if they get additional instruction, if they remain with the same teacher or if their parents or guardians sign a notice they want their student promoted. The school will have final say on whether student move on to the next grade or are retained.
The House bill does not address student promotion.
The state plan now out for public comment and review addresses the issue of underperforming schools and districts more broadly than the legislation in the House and the Senate.
Basically, it creates a five-tier system — accredited with distinction, accredited, provisionally accredited, unaccredited and lapsed – under which districts and individual schools will be classified.
It also spells out in general steps that the state may take at each step along the way once a school or a district is judged to be struggling, focusing on early intervention and keeping children in schools in their community wherever possible.