School boards can require students to attend year-round schools, court says
A year ago, Superior Court Judge Howard Manning slapped down the Wake County Board of Education's plan to assign thousands of students to year-round schools.
The board did not have the statutory authority to make such assignments, Manning ruled, without the "informed consent" of parents.
This week, it was Manning who was overruled in a unanimous decision from the N.C. Court of Appeals.
In considerable detail, the opinion written by Judge Martha Geer and joined by Judges Douglas McCullough and Sanford Steelman, traces the constitutional and statutory authority granted to boards of education in setting policies, including the assignment of students to public schools. The court rejected the contention that children have the right to attend schools on a traditional calendar or that it denies equal protection to place some children in year-round schools and others in nine-month schools.
Because the three-judge panel was unanimous, there's no automatic right of appeal to the N.C. Supreme Court. Because the opinion, in my reading, is so clear and convincing, I doubt the Supreme Court would hear it on discretionary review.
That likely leaves it as a definitive authorization for school boards to proceed with an important strategy for maximizing available classroom space -- and potentially saving significant amounts of money in construction costs.
Wake County developed a plan for multi-track year-round schools, which divide students into four tracks, each with its own schedule. At any given time, three tracks are in school and one is on break. I see it as something like this:
Groups A, B, C and D attend Public School 1 on this schedule:
Winter: ABC
Spring: ABD
Summer: ACD
Fall: BCD
Suppose each group has 250 students. That would add up to 1,000 students attending PS1, but the school would need seats for only 750 at a time. There's a lot of cost difference in building a school for 750 instead of 1,000.
This has to be an option for every school system, including Guilford County, where the $457 million in school bonds we just approved won't address all our needs for classroom space.
Would a plan like this be popular with everyone? Absolutely not. That's why parents sued the Wake County school board. People like their kids to be out of school in the summer. I did.
But what we like and what we can afford aren't always the same.
The question of authority has just been settled. School boards are free to consider this option.
Addendum: In Wake County, each group in a multi-track system actually attends nine weeks, followed by three weeks off, on a staggered schedule year-round. With parent's consent, currently.
Comments (9)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
And if Dot has anything to do with it, I know which school will get scr*$%!ed first.
Posted on May 8, 2008 2:08 PM
She probably won't because the Guilford board isn't likely to consider something like this before she retires at the end of this year. It might be a good question to pose to the candidates who want to fill her seat.
Another question is, what constitutes being screwed on this issue? Is it the families whose kids are forced to attend year-round schools? Or the kids who are forced to sit in trailers when it might be possible to get them back in regular classrooms through creative scheduling? Or is it the taxpayers who are paying higher taxes to build schools that might not really be necessary if less expensive alternatives were employed?
Posted on May 8, 2008 2:32 PM
Doug,
Good question - and while there are affected people in each of the categories you mentioned, I was specifically referring to the students and families. I happen to have a lot of friends in Wake County and know the struggles they they have had to endure with this - not to mention the fact that some families are truly redistricted every year.
Think of child care. How would that work for parents who work and have young children?
Think of multiple siblings in different schools having different schedules - it absolutely happens today in Wake County. How would a family ever be able to plan vacations, quality time together, etc.
My children each spent 4 of their first 6 years of school in trailers. It wasn't optimal, but I don't think it affected their education. In fact, the rooms had better climate control and less noise. In fact, my children preferred the trailers to the classrooms.
Posted on May 8, 2008 4:01 PM
Very valid concerns. I think there would have to be some reasonable opt-out policies, especially for families whose kids would be put on drastically different schedules.
There's also the extra workload on teachers to consider, which means they have to be paid more, negating some of the savings in capital outlays.
About trailers, though, it seems to be a big problem beyond the mobile classroom itself is that they allow you to expand the student body but not some of the facilities that all kids use -- meaning you have more crowded cafeterias, gyms, media centers, etc.
No easy solutions unless we kick a lot more kids out of school to save space and expense. Maybe all middle schoolers.
Posted on May 8, 2008 4:13 PM
Doug,
Again you bring up an interesting point. I have said to several people this past week that in Guilford County Schools, I think 5th graders are better prepared for high school than 8th graders. I think GCS does a fairly good job at the elementary level and at the high school level. But the middle school level - that is a joke. I can tell you - there is no educating being done, at least at my children's middle school.
And for some children, without the consistency, they get bored and then don't go on to successful high school careers.
Posted on May 8, 2008 6:03 PM
Anon:
If your observations about middle school are true, it would certainly explain why the high school I'm at has some many students reading at a 4th or 5th grade level. Happily, my own daughter seems to be challenged at her middle school and we're hoping her brother will be, too, next year.
Posted on May 9, 2008 8:57 AM
I mean "so many" not "some many". Sorry
Posted on May 9, 2008 8:59 AM
I mean "so many" not "some many". Sorry
Posted on May 9, 2008 8:59 AM
I think this plan certainly has potential. To curb the quandry of children within the same family being on separate schedules I had initially thought that the schools could all communicate when/if scheduling was a concern.
However, I tossed that notion quickly aside because it would certainly be a scheduling nightmare... and with the inefficiency of GCS as is, it would certainly not be feasible. Of course, upon further thought, it might not be too difficult. If the schools would break down the groups alphabetically it might be possible (ie - Group A has students with last names A-G, etc). The problem therein (still) is that same group might be huge on the elementary level but small on the high school level, or vice versa.
Again, scheduling nightmare.
Of course, something else of concern would be teacher pay. If you have a teacher currently earning $30,000 for 10 months of work, you'll have to compensate them accordingly for working an additional two months, so their salary jumps to $36,000. If there are 50 teachers in a school, that brings an additional cost of $300,000 per year. Ouch. To me, that would seem to eat up any savings by building a school 25% smaller in a hurry. After only ten years, you're looking at $3,000,000. That doesn't account for the increased use of resources for keeping the school perennially lit, heated, cooled, watered, etc.
That still doesn't even explain how we would have high school graduations! Would you have four separate graduations? What about those entering college and not finishing until the end of summer?
I think it's a neat plan, but we just seem too heavily entrenched in the classic schedule to make it work anytime soon.
Posted on May 9, 2008 12:50 PM