Funds to Aid Low-Achieving Schools Voted

After a prolonged debate on whether it is enough, the Los Angeles Unified School District board Monday voted unanimously to spend $8.8 million to implement the first phase of its ambitious plan to improve the performance of students at the district’s worst schools.

The money--$1.3 million from the district’s reserve and the rest from federal funds earmarked for student integration and compensatory education for poor children--will be used to train teachers, parents and administrators and implement a variety of new programs aimed at meeting the special needs of low-income, low-achieving children.

The strategies will be employed in 70 inner-city schools, including 31 the district has identified as having student performance so poor that the state is on the verge of stepping in to help the district manage them.

The “non-achieving” schools--all predominantly black and Latino--had a majority of their students scoring below the 40th percentile on state tests in reading this year and last year.

Those schools “showed no growth from the time they took the test last year to this year,” said Pauline Hopper, the district’s associate superintendent for compliance. The tests are administered each year to third-, sixth- and eighth-graders across the state.

“While there are different students taking the test each year, scores should still improve,” Hopper said.

Under the plan, which will take effect immediately, techniques culled from successful programs around the country would be taught to instructors in low-achieving schools.

The plan also incorporates a variety of innovative programs, including an experimental ungraded program for elementary school students, a language development program to develop black students’ proficiency in standard English, and the creation of teacher training models at selected schools.

It also provides for incentive payments to schools that improve their academic performance, a first for the district.

“We hope that will motivate them to continue to progress and motivate the other schools to improve,” Hopper said.

In addition to allocating the $8.8 million, the board voted to ask the state for more than $68 million to implement an expanded program in 64 low-achieving schools.

The recommendations are part of a comprehensive $431-million plan developed by a team of teachers and administrators, aimed at reversing years of low academic achievement, particularly among students in inner-city, minority schools.

The plan incorporates many far-reaching ideas that other school districts have adopted to remedy chronic underachievement.

The plan’s chief elements are programs emphasizing smaller classes and strong early education, and training to raise teachers’ expectations for their pupils and better equip them to reach children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

The plan was approved in concept by the seven-member board in March, but provisions for its funding and implementation have been clouded by disagreements over priorities and the high cost of the program.

While some members were concerned that the cost is too high, others complained that it is not enough.

“I have some strong concerns with respect to the amount of money that’s being allocated,” said Rita Walters, whose South-Central Los Angeles district includes many of the schools on the so-called “critical list.”

“I’d like to see the whole $68 million come from the budget. We’re talking about $1.3 million from the general fund, and it’s nothing, it’s just nothing.”

But board member Leticia Quezada called the allocation “a major step forward” in improving the academic performance of the 75,000 students in the affected schools.

SCHOOL OVERCROWDING The Los Angeles Board of Education is considering several measures, including an expansion of the year-round school program and alterations in the school day, to cope with overcrowding that has pushed the 612,000-student district almost to the breaking point.

YEAR-ROUND SCHOOLS Benefits:

Increases the capacity of a school by 33% to 50%, generating about 60,000 seats in elementary schools.

Provides additional state funding to enhance instructional program.

Reduces the number of students bused.

Drawbacks:

Can create scheduling problems for families if children are on different tracks.

Requires district to air-condition schools for summer classes.

Costs $136,000 a year additional per campus.

EXTENDED SCHOOL YEAR Benefits:

Creates about 60,000 elementary classroom seats.

Frees classroom space for optional programs, such as enrichment, tutoring, etc.

Generates additional state funding.

Reduces number of students bused.

Drawbacks:

Lengthens school year, reduces vacation time.

Forces teachers to share classrooms.

INCREASED CLASS SIZE Benefits:

Creates about 18,000 additional seats.

Reduces the number of students bused out of overcrowded neighborhoods.

Drawbacks:

Might have negative educational ramifications.

Increases school density.

SHARED INSTRUCTIONAL ENVIRONMENT Benefits:

Reduces the number of students bused.

Provides flexibility in use of equipment and specialized subject offerings.

Drawbacks:

Increases school density.

Requires teachers to share classrooms.

PORTABLE CLASSROOMS Benefits:

Creates about 40,000 seats by using maximum number of bungalows.

Causes little disruption to ongoing educational program.

Drawbacks:

Placement requires about 18 months.

Most overcrowded campuses cannot accommodate more bungalows, so would not affect number of students bused.

NEW CONSTRUCTION Benefits:

Allows more students to attend neighborhood schools.

Drawbacks:

Requires several years to complete construction.

Enormously expensive.

REOPENING CLOSED SCHOOLS Benefits:

Provides about 8,000 seats without educational disruption.

Drawbacks:

Relatively expensive--from $640,000 to $2,400,000 per campus to reopen.

Would not reduce the number of students bused.