Education Town Hall Meeting-2010

8/9/2019 Education Town Hall Meeting-2010

1/47

North Lawndale Schools:

Gaining Ground, or on Shaky Ground?Town Hall Meeting 1

June 16, 2010


2/47

Acknowledgements The Lawndale Alliance wishes to acknowledge the following for making this town hall

meeting a success University of Illinois at Chicago, Institute for Policy and Community Engagement North Lawndale Community News

CAN-TV Willie Mae Bowling Revin Fellows Cynthia Flowers Family Focus Lawndale Dorothy Goldsmith Millie Goldsmith Deidre Green

Joseph Hoereth Valerie F. Leonard Isaac Lewis Leslie Lindsey Zina Simmons Mary Scott Ella Goodman Dorothy Williams

North Lawndale Schools: Gaining Ground or on Shaky Ground/June 16, 2010


3/47

What Well Cover

Panel 1:

Dorothy Williams- Trends in Elementary Reading and Math Scores

Mary Scott-Trends in High School Graduation and Drop Out Rates

Valerie F. Leonard- Overview of School Finance and Facilities

Panel 2:

Dorothy Goldsmith-Restorative Justice

Leslie Lindsey Lessons Learned from Teaching in Inner City Schools

Cynthia Flowers-Women Working to End School Violence (Deborah Movement)

Family Focus-Parents Leading the Way to School Improvement



4/47

Panel 1Elementary Math and Reading Scores

Presenter: Dorothy Williams



5/47

National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP)Part of No Child Left Behind legislationMeasures student progress against national standardsMath and Reading assessment every two years4th and 8th grade students

Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS)Administered every 5 years4th graders around the world45 participating countriesUS ranked 18th of 45 (60th percentile)US performance fell 2 points 2001 - 2006

Acceptable Yearly Performance (AYP)


School Performance Assessment Tools


6/47

Acceptable Yearly Progress

70% of students meet or exceed STATE standardsReading and Math

80% of Illinois elementary students met or exceeded standardson State exams

READING66.2% of students City-wide met or exceeded standards55.5% of North Lawndale students met or exceededstandards

MATH72.0% of students City-wide met or exceeded standards60.2% of North Lawndale students met or exceededstandards

AYP



7/47

76.3 75.4

71.769.1

68.1

63.1 62.3 62

58.8

53 52.5 52 51 50.8 50.5 50 49.1 48.546

44.6 43.6 41.9

35.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

North Lawndale Average: 55.5

City Average: 66.2

North Lawndale Elementary ISAT Reading Scores2009 School Performance vs. Community and City Averages



8/47

92.6

86.6

80.6

74.3 74.170.9

67.4 67.3 66.1 65.364

57 56.1 55.3 55.3 54 53 52.3 50.9 50.8

44.2

37.3 36.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

North Lawndale Average: 61.4

City Average: 72.0

North Lawndale Elementary ISAT Math Scores2009 School Performance vs. Community and City Averages



9/47

Notable GainsNorth Lawndale Elementary Schools 2008 - 2009

North Lawndale1.3 points in reading4.5 points in math

Frazier International Baccalaureate Magnet School

25-point gain in math18-point gain in readingLegacy

13.9-point gain in math15.8-point gain in reading

Other double-digit gainsLathrop, math (11.3)

Frazier Prep, math (10.8)Gregory, reading (10.3)Penn, math (10.2)

City-wide1.3 points in reading

3.4 points in math North Lawndale Schools: Gaining Ground or on Shaky Ground/June 16, 2010


10/47

20.7%

29.9%

51.1%

61.4%

36.98%

47.84%

64.75%

72.0%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

North Lawndale

Citywide

Elementary Math Scores: North Lawndale vs. City AveragePercent of Students meeting or exceeding ISAT math targets



11/47

25.7%

54.2%

40.33%

64.91%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

North Lawndale

Citywide

Elementary Reading Scores: North Lawndale vs. City AveragePercent of students meeting or exceeding ISAT reading targets



12/47

Don't need

restructuring

35%

School Choice

4%

Restructuring

Planning

4%

Restructuring

Implementation

57%

North Lawndale Elementary SchoolsFederal Improvement Status



13/47

No Restructuring RestructuringPlanning

RestructuringImplementation

School Choice

8 Schools (35%) 1 School (4%) 13 Schools (57%) 1 School (4%)

Hughes Webster Bethune Catalyst /Howland

Frazier Prep Chalmers

Frazier IB Crown

Kipp Dvorak

Learn Gregory

Legacy Henson

Pope Herzl

Plamondon JohnsonLathrop

Lawndale

Mason

Paderewski

Penn

North Lawndale Elementary SchoolsFederal Improvement Status



14/47

Panel 1Graduation and Dropout Rates

Presenter: Mary Scott



15/47

The State of Affairs in 2004

North Lawndale had a high school graduationrate of 38.8%

North Lawndale ranked 69th of Chicagos 77community areas in terms of the number ofstudents graduating from high school.

The city average at the time was 56.6%. The national graduation rate was 70%



16/47

56.4%

48.5%

46.9%43.4%

43.2%

38.8%

56.6%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

55.0%

60.0%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

South Lawndale

Lower West Side

Humboldt Park

Near West Side

East Garfield

North Lawndale

Citywide

4-Year Graduation Rates:North Lawndale vs. City and Nearby Communities

Source: Chicago Public Schools

In 2004, North Lawndale had a lower graduation rate than all of the

neighboring communities. North Lawndale Schools: Gaining Ground or on Shaky Ground/June 16, 2010


17/47

23.1%

12.5%

22.1%

13.2%

19.7%

12.4%

19.4%

13.1%

21.3%

15.6%15.7%

9.9%9.0%

11.0%

13.0%

15.0%

17.0%

19.0%

21.0%

23.0%

25.0%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

South Lawndale

Lower West Side

Humboldt Park

Near West Side

East Garfield

North Lawndale

Citywide

1-Year DropOut Rates:North Lawndale vs. City and Nearby Communities

Source: Chicago Public Schools

In 2004, North Lawndale had a higher high school dropout rate than allother neighboring communities



18/47

One Year Dropout Rates 1999-2009 In 2009, as a group, schools North Lawndale Students are most likely to

attend have a lower one-year dropout rate than the city average.

One Year Dropout Rates For All Grade 9-12 Students(Numbers represent percentages)

School Name 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Farragut 18.80 19.00 17.60 15.70 16.50 14.90 12.30 7.30 18.90 19.60 18.50

Marshall 27.80 12.00 13.30 12.50 14.20 14.90 9.70 17.00 8.60 10.30 15.30

Crane 18.60 18.00 19.00 15.30 23.40 21.20 19.50 14.30 7.10 19.50 13.50

Manley 23.70 24.00 14.90 25.00 16.10 15.70 7.30 1.60 2.00 11.00 10.10

North Lawndale College Prep - 7.70

Multicultural School of the Arts 1.00 6.60 7.30 6.80

School of Social Justice 5.80 2.20 6.40 6.50Infinity High School 1.10 - 3.70 5.50

North Lawndale Col lege Prep 1.10 4.40 5.30 9.40 3.00 8.20 4.00 7.10 3.30 3.10 5.30

Collins Academy 1.40 5.10orld Language Academy 1.00 0.60 4.80 4.00

Power House 3.70

estinghouse (Closed 2007) 10.30 7.10 10.00 10.10 10.10 9.30 6.50 9.70 16.00

Average for Community Sample 18.00 15.48 14.02 15.58 14.64 14.98 10.56 6.90 6.09 8.99 9.91

City Average 17.26 15.263 15.05 13.33 14.29 10.91 10.57 8.97 9.47 11.09 10.26

Note: These numbers represent the number of students dropping out after one year, and do not take into account the

cumulative effects of the number of students in a given class dropping out over the course of four years. The cumulative

percentages are significantly higher over the course of 4 years.

GreaterthanCity

Avg.

Less

thanCityAvg.

Source: Chicago Public Schools North Lawndale Schools: Gaining Ground or on Shaky Ground/June 16, 2010


19/47

Economic Impact of Dropping out The economic impact of dropping out of high school is staggering.

Robert Wise, President of the Alliance for Education, shared thefollowing facts during a recent meeting in Chicago.

About 17,000 Chicago public school students did not graduate with theirclass in 2007. The lost lifetime earnings in Chicago for this class ofdropouts total more than $4.5 billion.

Each class of dropouts from the Chicago Public School district wouldsave the city more than $280 million in reduced health care costs over

the course of their lifetimes if they graduate.

If 1,000 additional Chicago students were to graduate, it is estimatedthey would earn approximately $20 million in increased income a year(based on median annual income by level of education).

Source: Wise, R. Transforming Lives and Communities: Building Public and Private Will to Overcome

the Dropout Crisis. (2008) Alliance for Excellent EducationNorth Lawndale Schools: Gaining Ground or on Shaky Ground/June 16, 2010


20/47

Getting Behind the Numbers

Voices of Youth in Chicago Education(VOYCE), a collaborative of youth from around

the city used youth researchers to survey youthon the reasons why they drop out.



21/47

What VOYCE Found Finding #1: Students in Chicago Public Schools believe that they

are the ones to blame for the failures of the school system.

Finding #2: Dropping out is not something that students plan or

anticipate. It is something that happens slowly over time.

Finding #3: Teachers, parents, and students agree that relevancein curriculum is critical to students engagement in school. Students often dont find the curriculum to be relevant

Finding #4: The curriculum needs to explicitly make theconnection that school is a stepping stone to college and futurecareers. One way to do this is by taking students to visit college campuses

Source: Student- Led Solutions to the Nations Dropout Crisis, A Report by Voices of Youth in Chicagos Education, November, 2008



22/47

Finding #5: Teaching techniques must accommodate many different stylesof learning because different methods work for different students.

Finding #6: Students state that family and friends influence them themost, even more than teachers and counselors. 58% of students said that the best thing about their school was the students. Highlights the importance of peer-to-peer influence in motivating students to stay

in school. It is important to increase the influence that teachers and counselors have on

students

Finding #7: More security does not necessarily lead to a greater feeling ofsafety. 64% of students think that it is easy to sneak things that are prohibited into

school. However, 47% DO NOT think that having better metal detectors in the school

would make it safer.

Finding #8: For a learning environment to be safe, students must not onlyfeel physically safe, but feel safe to express themselves.



23/47

Panel 1School Finances and Facilities

Presenter: Valerie F. Leonard



24/47

FY 2010 Budget SummaryFY 2010 Proposed Budget for All Funds (In Millions)

Fund Type FY 2008Expense

FY 2009Adopted

FY 2010Proposed

FY 09-FY 10$Change

FY 09-FY 10% Change

Special Fund $3,280.9 $3,550.3 $3,666.0 $ 115.7 3.3%

Special Revenue 1,113.7 1,304.6 1,661.9 357.3 27.4%

Operating Total $4,394.7 $4,854.9 $5,327.9 $ 473.0 9.7%

Debt Service 260.4 288.1 499.7 211.6 73.4%

Capital Projects 463.1 1,014.4 1,035.4 21.0 2.1%TotalAppropriation

$5,118.2 $6,157.4 $6,863.0 $ 705.6 11.5%



25/47

City of Chicago

Local School Funding Mix 2002-2009 The total funding mix remains relatively flat

The one-time payment of $383 million in federal Stimulus funding

essentially restored federal funding to 2002 levels.

Year Fiscal Year

LocalProperty

Other LocalGeneral

StateOther State Federal

Taxes Funding Aid Funding Funding

(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

2002 2000 - 01 42.1 4.1 19.6 17.1 17

2003 2001 - 02 43.5 3.1 22 16.3 15.1

2004 2002 - 03 44.1 2.6 21.1 16.2 16

2005 2003 - 04 42.5 3.2 21.4 15.4 17.52006 2004 - 05 43.9 2.5 22.4 13.1 18

2007 2005 - 06 44.1 3.9 22.7 12.7 16.7

2008 2006 - 07 42.3 7.7 22.3 12.6 15.1

2009 2007 - 08 42.1 4.5 22.9 13.7 16.8

Source: Illinois Board of Education (ISBE) Interactive Report Card



26/47

City of Chicago

Local School Expenditures 2002-2009 Approximately one half of CPSs budget has been spent on

Instruction

Year Fiscal Year

Instruction General Support Other

(%)Administratio

nService

sExpenditure

s

(%) (%) (%)

20022000 - 01 49.3 1 41.2 8.5

20032001 - 02 50.7 1.6 38.5 9.2

20042002 - 03 50.3 1.7 39.3 8.8

20052003 - 04 51.8 1.2 36.7 10.2

20062004 - 05 49.6 1.1 39.7 9.6

20072005 - 06 52 1.2 38.6 8.2

20082006 - 07 50.5 1.2 37 11.3

20092007 - 08 50.5 1.2 38.4 9.9

Source: Illinois Board of Education (ISBE) Interactive Report CardNorth Lawndale Schools: Gaining Ground or on Shaky Ground/June 16, 2010


27/47

FY 2011 Budget Status

Budget scheduled to be approved in August,2011

CPS has been holding regular and special boardmeetings to address a potential $700 million deficit

Potential methods of closing the budget gaps include Borrowing up to $800 million

Laying off 2,700 teachers

Increasing individual class sizes to 35 pupils

Chicago Teachers Union is opposed to the layoffs Newly elected CTU President believes the budget

process should be more transparent.



28/47

The Relationship Between

Chicago Public Schools and TIFs Over $58.5 million in TIF funds have been used to secure general

obligation bonds issued by CPS between 2002 and 2004. (1)

According to a study carried out by Robert Ginsburg and Don

Wiener on behalf of SEIU's Illinois Council, Chicago's TIF systemabsorbed $552 million in property tax revenue in 2008.

Considering that over half of every property tax dollar goestoward schools, it's fair to assume that roughly $300 million ofthe revenue generated in TIF districts each year would otherwise

end up in CPS's coffers.

Instead, that money is stashed away for the Daley administrationto use as it saw fit. (2)

(1) CPS FY2010 Budget2)Adam Doster, ATeacher's Fight To Open Up Chicago's TIF Budget, Progress Illinois, May 19,2010



29/47

Worth Noting

The City of Chicagos budget allowed for costscovering up to 30 charter schools.

The State Legislature recently lifted the cap onthe number of charter schools allowed in theState.

It is expected that the number of charter schoolswill increase over time.



30/47

The Chicago Public Schools 2010 budget allowed forover $310 million in payments to charterschools, yet the CPS financials do not provide individual financial

summaries for Charter Schools The CPS capital assessments do not include capital

plans for charter schools CPS has a history of increasing capital expenditures in

certain failing traditional schools, closing them and

effectively re-opening them as charters This action effectively transfers assets from traditional

schools to charter schools with almost no accountabilityto the public.



31/47

Local School Finances Financial profiles are presented in the FY 2010

budget for all schools, except contract and charter

schools. Samples are found in the handouts

Capital Assessments for each school may be foundon a searchable database.

A sample is in the handouts

The School Assessment database can be accessedthrough the following CPS link:

http://www.csc.cps.k12.il.us/servlet/CIP?ASMT=YNorth Lawndale Schools: Gaining Ground or on Shaky Ground/June 16, 2010
http://www.csc.cps.k12.il.us/servlet/CIP?ASMT=Yhttp://www.csc.cps.k12.il.us/servlet/CIP?ASMT=Yhttp://www.csc.cps.k12.il.us/servlet/CIP?ASMT=Y


32/47

Panel 2Restorative Justice

Presenter: Dorothy Goldsmith



33/47

North Lawndale Juvenile

Justice Collaborative North Lawndale Juvenile Justice Collaborative was established in 2002 as a

community led organization.

Mission: to educate, advocate and organize with the community to keep youthout of the Juvenile Justice System by building and offering community basedprevention and intervention alternatives that are grounded in the philosophy ofBalanced And Restorative Justice

The intergenerational Justice Group sought out principals in our neighborhoodschools trying to understand and change the fate of our youth in Elementary and

High School.



34/47

What We Found Between 1999 and 2003, over 10,000 youth were

arrested and referred to Juvenile Court from the

North Lawndale Community.

There were 720 North Lawndale cases pendingin Juvenile court, the largest number of cases

from any community in Chicago. The ChicagoTribune exposed the Cook County JuvenileTemporary Detention Center as a warehousefor kids.



35/47

Juvenile Arrests

Number of Juvenile

Arrests by District, 2008

In 2008, 10 of the 25 Policedistricts accounted for 64% ofthe juvenile arrests.

Rank District

1 District 8

2 District 11 (North Lawndale)

3 District 3

4 District 6

5 District 15

6 District 4

7 District 5

8 District 7

9 District 25

10 District 9

Source: Chicago Police Department, Juvenile Justice Volume 4 Issue 1Juvenile Arrest Trends 2003-2008



36/47

Juvenile Arrests by Offense Type

The top two offenses were drugabuse violation and simple

battery.

The offenses with the largest

increases between 2003 and2008 were Robbery

Miscellaneous non-indexoffenses,

Vandalism and warrant arrests

The offenses with the greatestdecreases include Drug abuse violations

Simple battery

Motor vehicle theft


Source: Chicago Police Department, Juvenile Justice Volume 4 Issue 1

Juvenile Arrest Trends 2003-2008


37/47

What We Need Alternatives to detention and the Juvenile Court

are needed in communities like North Lawndale

We need community based projects focused ondiverting court cases have great potential todecrease youth involvement in the JuvenileJustice System.



38/47

Principles of Restorative JusticeCrimes Hurt Everyone

Victims Offenders

Community

Foundation of Restorative Justice

Genuine, Active Accountability

Important Voices

Survivors Offenders Community



39/47

Balanced and Restorative

Justice Strategies1. Conflict Resolution2. Community Panels for Youth3. Peace Making Circles4. Expungement Help Desks- Free LAFMC5. Community Safety- Walking School Bus6. Building Block Clubs *Block Club University



40/47

Truancy and the Crime CycleChronic

Absence/

Truancy AcademicFailure

Retention

Bullying

ViolentBehavior/

Delinquency

ISS/OSSSubstance

Abuse

GangInvolvemen

t

Dropout

Crime

Prison



41/47

Why Communities & Schools Should

Be Concerned A High School Diploma Is the Base for Economic

Development Workforce with entry-level skills & Servicing in

Government and Civil Servicejobs, Military, Reserves, Coast Guards and Peace Corp.A High School Diploma is the Baseline for highereducation and advanced skills

Cost of Doing Education Right Is Less Than Not DoingIt Right

Family Courts and Prisons Welfare and Social Services Drug Use and Rehabilitation Health Issues and Teen Pregnancy



42/47


43/47

NORTH/SOUTH LAWNDALE JUVENILE

JUSTICE COLLABORATIVEBalanced & Restorative JusticeConflict Resolution

Community Panels for Youth

Peace making Circles

COMMITMENT TO CORE StrategiesCivic & Civil Education

Mentoring/Tutoring

Service Learning Alternative Schooling Support After-School Opportunities



44/47

Panel 2Lessons Learned from

Teaching in Inner City Schools

Presenter: Leslie Lindsey



45/47

Panel 2Women Working to End SchoolViolence (Deborah Movement)

Presenter: Cynthia Flowers



46/47

Panel 2Parents Leading the Way to

School Improvement

Presenter: Revin Fellows



47/47

Follow Up: This presentation and handouts will be posted to

The Lawndale Alliance blog, athttp://lawndalealliance.blogspot.com

The North Lawndale Community News atFacebook.com

The North Lawndale Community News website athttp://nlcn.org

Policy on the Ground blog, at

http://policyontheground.net Scribd.com

Questions may be directed to Valerie F. Leonard at773-521-3137 [email protected]
http://lawndalealliance.blogspot.com/http://nlcn.org/http://policyontheground.net/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://policyontheground.net/http://nlcn.org/http://lawndalealliance.blogspot.com/

Documents

Education Town Hall Meeting-2010