L.A. Unified Launches New Crackdown

The Los Angeles Unified School District is shaking up its most troubled schools for the second time in three years by appointing new administrators and tightening control over campus budgets and instruction.

Responding to federal pressure to improve the schools, L.A. Unified leaders also are considering wholesale staff changes for next year at more than one-third of the district’s 49 high schools.

In addition, top district officials are considering working with an outside charter school operator who would run small programs in tandem with traditional campuses.

The Board of Education today will discuss several options to reinvigorate foundering campuses that serve mostly low-income and minority students -- options that will face stiff union opposition and other obstacles.

“It’s time for no more excuses on why we can’t do things drastically different,” said school board member Mike Lansing, who has introduced a proposal that would require teachers and administrators at 19 high schools to reapply for their jobs next year.

The latest campaign to improve schools is part of a broad -- some say unfairly painful -- reform agenda triggered by the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

The law requires districts nationwide to restructure campuses that have repeatedly failed to meet state achievement goals. Options include possibly replacing staff, relinquishing control to the state or reopening the campuses as charter schools.

School district leaders in Chicago and other big cities are similarly intervening in their schools.

Several Los Angeles campuses underwent staff shake-ups and other changes three years ago in response to state audits that cited low expectations, rundown buildings and other problems.

Since that time, most of the schools have raised their test scores, albeit modestly. District leaders say they hope that their latest efforts will build on that momentum.

“This is something you do not fix overnight,” said L.A. Unified School District Supt. Roy Romer. “We are taking every school individually. This is a very thorough process that we’re taking seriously.”

This year, officials are required by law to act at nine campuses that have missed annual test score targets seven years in a row.

Many of the campuses -- including Locke and Fremont high schools in South Los Angeles -- have been given additional administrators and money but are also facing increased district scrutiny of their teacher training and other operations.

They also are being reorganized into small learning communities that officials believe will offer students more personal attention at campuses that in some cases exceed 5,000 students.

District officials are working out similar reforms for 63 other elementary, junior and high schools that have missed their state test targets six years running.

The changes are visible on Fremont’s campus, where two co-principals have been installed since the start of the school year.

Co-Principal Rosa Diaz-Denny said the 5,040 students will be divided among 12 smaller communities in July -- a change that mirrors a similar arrangement at her last school, North Hollywood High.

“I’m a true believer,” she said of the smaller schools approach. “I’ve seen it firsthand. I know it in my heart and my experience that it does make a difference. I’ve lived it.”

But the two new principals have yet to earn the loyalty of some teachers, who grumble about changes being foisted on the school without their input.

“The two new principals ... are very authoritarian,” said librarian Mary Hoover, a 23-year Fremont veteran. “They come from the perspective that what is wrong with Fremont is the teachers.”

Romer and other district officials said it was unfair to paint all of the schools that had been targeted for district oversight as failures. He said the campuses must meet 46 criteria to move off the watch list.

Among other things, campuses must test at least 95% of students, including those in a variety of subgroups such as special education.

The schools also must ensure that a certain percentage of students are proficient in English and math each year.

Most of the schools remained on the oversight list the last two years because they did not test enough students.

Wilson High School in northeast Los Angeles tested 92% of its special-education students in English last year, up from 65% the year before. Despite the improvement, Wilson did not reach the 95% goal.

And so it remains under close district scrutiny. It is not alone. Similar testing problems have kept several high schools on the district’s list, including Banning, Bell, Belmont, Crenshaw, Huntington Park, Jefferson, Lincoln, Los Angeles, Roosevelt and Sylmar.

Wilson High’s former principal voiced frustration over the federal rules, saying that they make it virtually impossible to succeed and escape district control.

“We cleaned up the school,” said former Principal Phil Naimo, who arrived at Wilson in 2002 during the last shake-up and was promoted to oversee several middle schools. “I moved a lot of teachers. We had additional professional development. We got the community together and started receiving grants ... but still we did not meet [the federal targets]. That is harsh.”

Nonetheless, some school board members and top district leaders are dissatisfied. They see the need for more dramatic change in secondary schools -- and they are aiming squarely at teachers and administrators.

Lansing, for example, wants staff members at 19 high schools to reapply for their jobs and sign “compacts” to signal their commitment to the changes.

Lansing also would allow schools to reorganize their staffs and gain greater control of their budgets -- in contrast to Romer’s plans -- so they could address issues of security and pay to help attract qualified teachers.

“We have the opportunity to walk everyone out to the street and start with a clean slate,” Lansing said. “We need to stop hiding behind adult needs and really take a strong look at whether we have an opportunity to do things that put children first.”

But questions remain about whether the district could remove teachers and administrators without violating collective bargaining agreements.

The head of the 45,000-member Los Angeles teachers union vowed to fight the proposal, which he called “absolutely ludicrous.”

“To say that these schools are the problem, and asking people to reapply for their jobs is literally [like] the old expression of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic,” said United Teachers Los Angeles President John Perez.

Several school board members said they see merit in Lansing’s proposal, which is scheduled for a vote next Tuesday.

“We need to have these discussions. We need to move forward,” said board President Jose Huizar. “If we think that remedy fits a particular high school, we need to do that.”

David Marsh, associate dean of USC’s Rossier School of Education and an authority on high school reform, warned against ousting a school’s staff as a blanket approach to failing schools.

“We shouldn’t blame the teachers, but we have to create a new way for schools to work that allows teachers to succeed with kids,” Marsh said.

Romer is considering many approaches. He is consulting with Steve Barr, who operates Green Dot Public Schools, to possibly open charter programs on campuses. Charters are small, publicly funded schools free of many district regulations and policies.

And Romer and his staff have been meeting with Los Angeles school principals, teachers and parents to craft plans that are acceptable to all groups at their campuses.

“I view this process as an opportunity to turn to local schools and say, ‘We invite you to put on the table your ideas about what changes can help,’ ” Romer said. “I have to do this in a collaborative way.”

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Shaking up the schools

Los Angeles school officials are thinking about requiring the staffs of 19 struggling high schools to reapply for their jobs next year. Here are the schools with their scores on the state’s Academic Performance Index; a score of 800 is the goal.

*--* High Schools API Score Average yearly 2003-04 change* Sylmar 576 14.3 Bell 557 16.3 Banning 549 9.0 Hollywood 540 7.5 Wilson 532 6.8 Lincoln 529 8.8 Huntington Park 525 14.5 Garfield 523 1.8 Belmont 518 26.0 Roosevelt 517 8.8 Manual Arts 512 13.0 Los Angeles 503 0.3 Washington Prep 481 --2.5 Dorsey 471 4.5 Jefferson 464 18.3 Fremont 459 7.0 Locke 440 10.0 Jordan * 6.7 Crenshaw * 0.5

*--*

* No API score was assigned because not enough students were tested.

** Average yearly change in API scores, 1999-2000 through 2003-04. All five years’ data are not available for all schools.

Source: California Department of Education. Data analysis by Sandra Poindexter

*

Times data analyst Sandra Poindexter contributed to this story.