Mayor Adrian Fenty 
Testimony on the District of Columbia Public Education Reform Amendment Act of 2007, Bill 17-001
February 27, 2007

DCPSWatch Home

Major Areas
DC Public Schools
Mayoral Takeover
Special Education

State Education Agency
State Education Office
Vouchers
WTU
Wilson S.H.S.

Calendars
Board of Education
School Year

Columns
Elizabeth Davis
Ron Drake
Erich Martel
Nathan Saunders

Directories
Schools

Letters

Links

Organizations
DC Education Compact
Parents United
Proposition 100%

Press

Search

DCWatch Home

“District of Columbia Public Education Reform Amendment Act of 2007”
Adrian Fenty, Mayor

I want to thank the Council for the extensive public hearings to consider the District of Columbia Public Education Reform Amendment Act of 2007. When I last appeared before you, more than a month ago, I committed to coming back to you today with detailed responses to your questions and issues raised by the public. Before I respond to the issues raised, I would like to take a moment to share my perspective on where we are going as a city and why I believe this legislation more important than anything we have ever considered before.

I have proposed, as my first initiative and first priority as Mayor, a radical, yet deliberate proposal to deliver on a promise we make to our children as a society. Education is that promise; quality public education is a civil right, and I firmly believe we have a moral obligation to deliver. We can do this, but only if we do this together, as a city. Schools can no longer be islands unto themselves. Their special mission is to educate and develop children. The responsibility to carry out this mission, however, is one that we all share. 

The change I envision is change that transforms not just the school system, but the entire infrastructure behind public education services in the District. A comprehensive approach to school reform is needed. Great schools alone cannot ensure that our children succeed, and likewise, if we provide all of the other supports and services, but fail to provide excellent educational opportunities, our children may not realize their full potential.

I have presented the Council with the following basic proposal: that we have a responsive public education system that treats parents and community members like customers and partners; that we have a strong, centralized state education agency positioned to exercise oversight over all local education agencies in the District on equal terms; that our school system is able to focus on its core mission – teachers and principals focus on teaching and learning, not repairs and maintenance; that our city agencies provide the supports and targeted assistance to schools to overcome the challenges faced by too many of our students; that our public charter schools are as strong and vibrant and are accountable to the public as public schools should be; and that accountability is clear, direct, and placed where it belongs – with the Mayor.

In the eyes of the citizens, the Mayor, like the governor of any state, is ultimately responsible for whether children are educated in the District. Residents express this all the time, asking me to “fix the schools” or asking, “Can’t you do something about the schools?”

Because of that fact and the critical challenge we face, I believe that a governance model that holds the Mayor accountable is the best model for the District at this time. The structure proposed by Bill 17-001 establishes a comprehensive framework by which the Mayor can effect change. I firmly believe it is the comprehensiveness of this bill that will ensure our success – and I ask that the Council consider the bill as one comprehensive piece of legislation. It is not an omnibus bill; the parts are not separate and distinct. Just as no single element of reform can be expected to achieve results independently, the elements of this bill are dependent on one another.

Again, I thank the Council for leading the productive public hearing process we have had over the past month. I found it very helpful. I heard the voices of the public and in response, I would like to provide some clarity to the proposals I have put forward. In some cases, I offer some suggestions for improving the legislation based on what we have heard from our citizens. 

I have heard the Council and the public’s desire for more information that addresses special education directly. There is no doubt that the problems that the school system has in delivering quality special education services to students in need are major cost drivers of the budget and are both cause and consequence of the structural and managerial dysfunction of the system. We need to move swiftly to address special education – I have proposed an action plan detailing specific reform initiatives that I believe we can implement, starting immediately, when the Mayor is accountable for the school system. These include:

• Embracing a culture of inclusion across the system
• Improving student achievement and increasing parent resources
• Improving professional development for teachers to better support students with special needs
• Improving the infrastructure, including IT, record-keeping, and the funding formula, to support special education reforms

There is no easy fix to the special education issue, but there are recommendations and ideas for reform on the table, and stakeholders we can engage, like the State Advisory Panel on Special Education, to guide our efforts.

We cannot improve the situation with special education in the District, however, unless we also improve our general education services as well. Through the comprehensive framework I have proposed, we will transform our second-class public education system into a world-class system. I expect DCPS to produce students who can compete locally, nationally and internationally. This endeavor toward excellence will demand an intense focus on student success above all else, a strategic prioritization of resources, and relentless attention to implementation. Just like other agencies under my administration, the school system and the transformation on which we are about to embark will be managed by outcomes; I will hold the Chancellor and the other agencies who are supporting our public education system accountable for tangible results, with the ultimate focus on student achievement.

A broad array of outcomes will be measured. At the local level, we will continue to track the progress of our students using the District of Columbia Comprehensive Assessment System (DC-CAS); at the national level, the National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) will be our yardstick. While standardized assessment results and school progress with regard to Adequate Yearly Progress are important, truly measuring increases in student achievement requires a comprehensive analysis of all of the outcome-related measures, including drop-out rates, truancy rates, graduation rates, SAT scores, and college attendance and completion. DCPS will raise the performance of all students – targeting lowest-performing schools and students with aggressive interventions and additional supports and increasing the rigor and options for high-performing students.

While it is premature to provide specific targets and benchmarks, I have provided the Council with a draft academic action plan, similar to the action plan developed for special education. DCPS has articulated a new Mission, a set of Core Beliefs and Commitments, a Master Education Plan and a Master Facilities Plan. I recognize these reform principles and documents as the product of significant community involvement and I am committed to them as the starting point for reform efforts following the passage of the “District of Columbia Public Education Reform Amendment Act of 2007”.

As a foundation for our work, four main ingredients will contribute to our success: 

1. Human capital – DCPS must be built with effective teachers, principals, support staff, and central administrators, who are held accountable for their performance.
2. World-class service – DCPS must be responsive to its stakeholders, which include students, parents, community members and employees.
3. Freedom and flexibility – central administration must balance accountability with empowerment, according to the needs and performance of individual schools or particular classrooms.
4. Data-driven decision-making – we will rely on data to accurately assess student learning and make informed decisions to continually promote student achievement, and the Chancellor will institute an accountability system referred to as SchoolStat.

The action plan I have developed identifies a set of high priority goals and strategies that fit within the framework of the Master Education Plan. Some of these are strategies that have been adopted already by DCPS, but not implemented fully. Others are strategies that were not discussed explicitly in the MEP, but support the implementation of MEP objectives. A few of the specific actions I plan to drive the implementation of within DCPS include:

• Refine the K-8 comprehensive reading and math models, including piloting double math class in 2 middle schools for 2007-2008 academic year, based on the model developed by former National Teachers of the Year, Jason Kamras, at Sousa Middle school.
• Expand access to more rigorous courses at the high school level.
• Pilot extended learning programs.
• Expand career and technical education programs, including partnering with labor organizations to strengthen programming and tie it to key initiatives in apprenticeship programs across District.
• Develop a talent pipeline for teachers and principals, and ensure that a career ladder is in place that cultivates leadership and initiative.
• Institute school-based professional development models through partnerships with organizations.
• Conduct an assessment and evaluation of existing alternative education programs within 100 days, and develop more placement options that will address student offenses through specific programs to meet student needs using a tiered system. 

The strategies outlined above and in the action plan are not all-inclusive. There will be continuous dialogue between the Mayor and the Chancellor once a preliminary analysis of the school system is completed after the legislation passes.

As I stated earlier, one of the key components of the structure I am proposing is the separation of important functions from the responsibilities of the school system, to improve the performance of those functions and to enable the Chancellor to focus on his chief responsibility of educating students within DCPS. The separation of state and local education functions in the District is very important, and has been recommended by numerous experts, entities, and reports, including the U.S. Department of Education. I believe my proposal makes sense and accomplishes the goal of establishing a strong, central state education agency that has the ability to oversee the performance and progress of all local education agencies according to rigorous state standards for achievement. It is important to note that it does not re-create the same conflict of interest problem that currently exists within DCPS. Under the current structure, we have the staff performing both state and local functions in the same office – often they’re the same staff. My proposal establishes two separate lines of accountability, one to the Mayor and one to the District Department of Education. While it is true that, like other states, I, as the governor, am ultimately accountable for both state and local performance, I believe the structure I have proposed ensures sufficient independence and oversight.

The need to establish a separate entity with responsibility for school facilities has been well-documented by students, parents, and teachers in these hearings. The Mayor and Council have made the resources available to modernize our schools – it’s time to accelerate that program and fix these buildings. Bill 17-001 proposes a Facilities Management and Construction Authority to accomplish this task. We have been exploring various models and methods around the country. Because other cities have used independent authority models with mixed results, it is important to my administration to create a structure that brings together the best in private sector asset management and construction management expertise with a public sector sense of mission and accountability. We have adopted some key design principles that will guide the development of this new entity:

1. Control of the Authority must be placed in the “owner,” who, in the District, would be the government, in support of its agency, the District of Columbia Public Schools;
2. Maintain a lean in-house management team;
3. Utilize innovative contracting;
4. Maintain transparency and sound financial management; and 
5. Focus constantly on achieving the educational mission of DCPS and the social and financial interests of the District. 

Commonly referred to as a ‘portfolio management model’, the entity we are structuring will combine asset management, construction management, and operations and maintenance management under one leadership level who works closely with the Chancellor and is accountable to the Mayor. Utilizing the data and planning provided by effective asset management, construction and maintenance managers will be empowered to make economically rational decisions around a portfolio of buildings, rather than just modernize one or two schools at a time. I am confident that with this right model in place, we will finally be able to go around the city and see new schools being built as fast and as well, and maintained as efficiently as Class A commercial buildings – schools we can be proud of, schools that inspire our teachers to teach our children to learn.

For high level state policy decisions, I think the State Board of Education provides an excellent vehicle for providing extra credibility and representation of the public’s views behind the decision-making of the Chief State School Officer. It is important for the public to understand that this body is not merely an advisory board, nor does the State Board of Education play a lesser role in the District of Columbia with regard to public education. We are creating a true state education framework, similar to what other states have. We will have a stronger, centralized role for the Chief State School Officer, whose focus will finally be on aligning all of the District’s education programs, from early childhood through adult education, with a coherent vision and set of standards. Bolstering this role, the State Board of Education is charged by the legislation with the responsibility of approving the state academic standards for the District for learners of all ages and the state accountability plan that must be submitted to the federal government. These are substantive policy matters. They are challenging to develop and require regular updating. The State Accountability Plan, which the District is required to submit to the U.S. Department of Education, also involves very important policy decisions, such as the state definition of making Adequate Yearly Progress, state determinations for student achievement measures at local education agencies, and consequences for failure to meet targeted academic goals.

I do think it is reasonable for, and I would support, the Council to explore additional high-level state policy items, like making regulations governing the approval of independent schools, approving licensing and qualification standards of public school personnel, and recommending changes to state education statutes. Again, these are important expressions of our values and expectations as a city regarding public education – it would be appropriate for a representative State Board to weigh in on these issues.

Perhaps the issue I heard most frequently in the hearings and at meetings with community leaders, PTAs, and advocates around the city was that of public input regarding school policy. As residents of this city know, I take public input and engagement very seriously, and any agency under my leadership will do the same. My staff and the staff of the Deputy Mayor for Education will continue to meet frequently with education leaders and advocates.

When it comes to the school policies, I think a multi-tiered approach makes sense. At the basic customer service level, leaders of the system need to know what is working and what is not. The creation of an ombudsman office to accept, respond to, and review resident questions and complaints about schools and services will enable the administration to track and identify systemic issues within the system. In many cases, this will lead to correction of a problem; in other cases, it could lead to changes in policy that are needed to improve the delivery of educational services. I believe parents can have the greatest impact on their child’s education by being involved with their local school. Taking a leadership role, or simply participating in developing and shaping local school policy, is the most direct way to benefit your child’s schooling. My administration will place an emphasis on local school and parent empowerment by strengthening Local School Restructuring Teams and PTAs. And to ensure that parents have the tools and skills to be effective, we will provide meaningful parent training and enrichment programs through parent academies and an Office of Parent and Community Involvement.

I also understand and respect the desire and right of citizens to weigh in on the development and implementation of school policy at a higher level. It certainly is not my intent to lessen access and input to policymakers within the school system. Under the legislation, the Mayor would be granted the authority to amend Title 5 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations, which governs the school system. I commit to reviewing the Title 5 regulations regarding public input, notice, and rulemaking procedures and recommending changes that will ensure that adequate public involvement in policy development continues. Additionally, I would require the Chancellor to establish a regular schedule of public meetings, briefings, and hearings, at least on a quarterly basis, to vet potential and upcoming policy proposals with the public and to hear from the public on the implementation of policies already in place.

A comprehensive approach includes more than just putting the Mayor in charge – it includes all of the other things we’ve talked about – ensuring that the school system can focus on its main mission of educating students, establishing clear separation of mission between state and local functions, creating a framework through which other city services are marshaled to support public education for learners of all ages, and ensuring clear accountability throughout the public education system.

Finally, I would like to note the significance of the process itself in which we have engaged – the public dialogue over the past two months in this city, so focused on public education – it is truly groundbreaking. I implore the residents and community leaders to join with me in continuing this dialogue – it will not end with the passage of this legislation. I am committed, and I ask that residents and community leaders alike commit, to supporting the ultimate decision that is made. I will of course continue to advocate for the comprehensive proposal I have submitted, but regardless what the final structure looks like, I will be supportive and actively engaged as Mayor in transforming our schools. I urge the Council to complete its deliberation quickly and move forward with a comprehensive bill.

Thank you. I would be happy to respond to your questions