State Scolds District on Students’ Performance : Education: The report says major new resources have not helped. The district is blamed for not following up on initial efforts.

A state report chides the Compton Unified School District for not doing more with “a multitude of resources” provided by the state over the past six years to improve the performance of students.

The report said the state made an “extraordinary effort” to improve Compton schools--helping the district win a $250,000 grant to assist underachieving students, organizing seminars, expanding a mathematics and science program, and helping district officials develop stronger ties with colleges and universities.

But Compton officials generally failed to follow through on these initial efforts, the report contended.

The Department of Education report, prepared at the request of Assemblyman Willard H. Murray, seems to bolster the Paramount Democrat’s repeated complaints that the district has failed to educate its 27,000 students adequately.

Compton students consistently have ranked near the bottom on statewide achievement tests. In 1989-90 Compton students ranked in the first percentile statewide in every category, meaning that 99% of the students in the state scored higher than Compton students in topics ranging from reading to science. No tests were given last year because of state spending cuts.

The report, which was issued last Friday, is likely to set off a new round of wrangling between Murray and district officials, who have been at odds over the direction of Compton schools.

Murray noted that the report “causes me great anguish” because it shows that academic achievement remains “dismal.” In a letter to Compton School Supt. J.L. Handy, Murray said the report shows that Compton officials apparently “have shown less and less willingness to engage in the hard work necessary to create improvements for students.”

Handy said he believes the report is “neither flattering nor unflattering” but shows some “minimal improvement” in education given Compton students.

But School Board President John Steward criticized the report, saying state education officials are “taking credit for things we’ve done that they had no participation in.” He contended that if the district is left alone, “I think we’ll educate kids.”

Last year, Murray, whose district includes Compton, amended the state budget bill to require the study. Even while the report was being prepared, he stepped up his campaign against the district, unsuccessfully seeking legislation ranging from a review of the district’s teaching methods to a drastic “last-resort” state takeover of poor-achieving campuses within the district.

In response, some Compton school trustees sought to unseat Murray in the recent primary election. eEarlier this month, Murray won the Democratic nomination to the Assembly and appears headed for an easy reelection in November.

Reggie Fair, who was recently retained by the district as a Sacramento lobbyist, said he does not believe the Department of Education report is tainted by the political feud. “I think its findings should be considered objective,” he said. Fair said such problems as low test scores cited in the report are not unique to Compton and plague other urban districts as well.

The report was issued by the Department of Education’s specialized programs branch, the same arm of the agency that has sought to provide help to Compton.

The report notes that between 1988 and 1991, there was growth in the number of students completing college preparatory classes at Dominguez and Compton high schools. Even so, progress has been minimal when measured by the number of students going on to the University of California, according to the report.

The state’s efforts in Compton in recent years helped improve the district and “stop the skid,” contends Shirley Thornton, a deputy superintendent in the Department of Education.

But Thornton, who said she regularly visited the district, scolded the district for failing to “follow through” to implement the programs recommended by the state.

For example, the report said, the district agreed to participate in a program to reshape classroom education by first identifying a range of problems facing schools, including inadequate parent participation.

But, the report continued, “as the amount of time and effort to implement needed changes became apparent, the schools in Compton seemed to reduce their participation.” The number of schools in the program dropped from 21 to nine.

Steward, the school board president, said the program duplicated other programs and was too expensive, costing $10,000 per school.

What will happen next is unclear.

Handy said he expects the board of trustees to review the report, which contains no recommendations. Murray said he plans to send out copies of the report to community leaders, solicit reactions from Handy and other district officials and probably continue to push legislation aimed at the Compton district.

Murray was not optimistic about getting a quick reply from the district.