Home
Bibliography
Calendar
Columns
Dorothy Brizill
Bonnie Cain
Jim Dougherty
Gary Imhoff
Phil Mendelson
Mark David Richards
Sandra Seegars
DCPSWatch
DCWatch
Archives
Council Period 12
Council Period 13
Council Period 14
Election 1998
Election 2000
Election 2002
Elections
Election
2004
Election 2006
Government and People
ANC's
Anacostia Waterfront Corporation
Auditor
Boards and Com
BusRegRefCom
Campaign Finance
Chief Financial Officer
Chief Management Officer
City Council
Congress
Control Board
Corporation Counsel
Courts
DC2000
DC Agenda
Elections and Ethics
Fire Department
FOI Officers
Inspector General
Health
Housing and Community Dev.
Human Services
Legislation
Mayor's Office
Mental Health
Motor Vehicles
Neighborhood Action
National
Capital Revitalization Corp.
Planning and Econ. Dev.
Planning, Office of
Police Department
Property Management
Public Advocate
Public Libraries
Public Schools
Public Service Commission
Public Works
Regional Mobility Panel
Sports and Entertainment Com.
Taxi Commission
Telephone Directory
University of DC
Water and Sewer Administration
Youth Rehabilitation Services
Zoning Commission
Issues in DC Politics
Budget issues
DC Flag
DC General, PBC
Gun issues
Health issues
Housing initiatives
Mayor’s mansion
Public Benefit Corporation
Regional Mobility
Reservation 13
Tax Rev Comm
Term limits repeal
Voting rights, statehood
Williams’s Fundraising Scandals
Links
Organizations
Appleseed Center
Cardozo Shaw Neigh.Assoc.
Committee of 100
Fed of Citizens Assocs
League of Women Voters
Parents United
Shaw Coalition
Photos
Search
What Is DCWatch?
themail
archives
|
GOVERNMENT
OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
"School
Choice in the District of Columbia: Opening Doors
for Parents and Students"
Statement
of
Anthony
A. Williams
Mayor
District of Columbia
Committee on Government Reform
United States House of Representatives
The Honorable Thomas M. Davis, III, Chairman
The Honorable Henry A. Waxman, Ranking Member
Tuesday, June 24, 2003
2154
Rayburn House Office Building
2:00 p.m.
Good afternoon Chairman Davis, Ranking Member Waxman and
members of the Government Reform Committee. I am Anthony A. Williams,
Mayor of the District of Columbia. Chairman Davis, I greatly appreciate
the leadership, support and encouragement you have provided our great
city and look forward to continuing our partnership as we work together
to accomplish even greater initiatives for the citizens of the District-
starting, I hope, with a robust initiative to support education in our
nation's capital. In this spirit, I am pleased to come before you today
to discuss school choice and expanding educational options for parents
and students in the District of Columbia.
As you know, education is a major priority for my administration. My
vision for the children of the District of Columbia is that every child,
regardless of the school they attend, will have access to a high quality
education in a healthy and safe environment. I envision a city in which
every young person will: 1) come to school ready to learn, and leave
with the necessary skills to be successful in today's technologically
advanced society; 2) be taught to be responsible citizens and to make
valuable contributions to their local and global communities; and 3)
have access to adequate social services to support their learning. While
we have made major progress, we still have a long way to go before
realizing this vision.
Let me acknowledge that many good things are happening in the District's
schools. First, the District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS), under
the leadership of Superintendent Paul Vance and the Board of Education,
has launched an initiative to transform our lowest-performing schools,
infusing them with new leadership, staff and additional resources. We
now have identified 15 of these Transformation Schools and early
indications show us they are making a difference. My administration
strongly supports DCPS in this initiative, and has begun to provide
wrap-around supports services at five of these Transformation Schools.
By providing a host of family support services from District of Columbia
agencies at these schools, we hope to allow teachers to relinquish their
de facto roles as parttime health and welfare counselors to children and
their families, and allow them to focus completely on their role as
educators.
In addition, last year DCPS underwent a massive central office
transformation to streamline services and ensure that more resources
flow directly to the classroom. Moreover, together with the District Council, we have provided record pay
increases to our teachers, bringing entry level pay closer to parity
with our suburban neighbors.
Third, DCPS has a strong out-of-boundary program that enables thousands
of students to attend the public schools of their choice. We have
several marquee programs focusing on college preparation, the arts, and bilingual education, to name just a
few, that attract parents and children from throughout the city.
Finally, just a few weeks ago the Secretary of Education announced the
approval of the DCPS's State Accountability Plan which I proudly
forwarded to the US Department of Education earlier this year. This plan
demonstrates great progress in how the District will comply with the No Child Left Behind
legislation.
As you know, the District also has a very robust public charter school
movement; we believe it is the strongest in the nation. We currently
have 42 charter schools, which provide approximately 11,500 students
with a range of educational programs including math and science,
technology, arts, English as a Second Language (ESL) and dual language
immersion, character development, public policy, and college preparatory
study. These schools offer many approaches to learning, including
individualized instruction, small academies, and schools within schools. Recognizing that significant progress has been made since 1995 when
Congress passed the District of Columbia School Reform Act, the District
public school system still faces an abundance of challenges. Many
students enter school with developmental challenges that have not been
effectively identified and addressed. Moreover,. the District must do
more to improve student achievement scores in kindergarten through 12th
grade. In school year (SY) 2000-2001, some 25 percent of DCPS students
scored below basic on the Stanford-9 Reading test and 36 percent scored
below basic in math. The more significant challenges include a large
special education population, increasing demands for adequate facilities
for both traditional and charter schools, and the need to attract and
retain highly qualified teachers. Thus, despite the steady increases in local
funding1, and other efforts to support our public
schools, I have heard firsthand from hundreds of parents who feel there
are no practical and easy alternatives for their children within the
current systems of public schools.
This gets to the crux of the matter. Our dynamic Transformation Schools
Initiative, our liberal out-of-boundary enrollment programs, and our
robust charter schools are providing real choices for some parents. But
there are still countless students whose schools are not among those on
the fast track to transformation and for whom there are no practical
charter school alternatives. Even if we are successful in increasing the
tempo on these initiatives, there will be tens of thousands of students
still waiting for more choices. I cannot tell parents that they must
continue to wait while there are other outlets in our midst. In short, we need to reexamine the way we do business. It is time that
we explore other solutions to ensure that every child has access to a
quality education in the District. I have confidence that our public
school system is getting better, but that does not mean that I, as the
elected Mayor of this city, should ignore other educational assets
currently at our disposal. To that end, I welcome the federal
government's interest in our public schools and the success of the
District's children.
Along with City Council Education Committee Chair Kevin Chavous and
Board of Education President Peggy Cooper Cafritz, I support a
three-sector approach that would focus new federal resources towards
increasing the availability of quality educational options for District
students and families. This strategy would require a significant and
on-going investment toward the following: 1) the development of a
federally funded scholarship program for students to attend non-public
schools; 2) permanent and predictable support for DCPS targeted at
leadership, instructional excellence and student achievement; and 3) a
fiscally sound and comprehensive approach to the acquisition and
renovation of charter school facilities. Why a three-sector approach? The most compelling reasons focus on
fairness, the legacy of federal-District relations, and a strong sense
that choice means the most when the number of quality educational options is maximized. Specifically, I mean that
while DCPS faces considerable administrative and operational challenges
that transcend any particular funding level, our public schools are
paying the price of a legacy of disinvestment and crumbling school
buildings, many constructed originally by the federal government. While
bearing the costs associated with both a local school district and a
state system, the city has the tax base of neither. As the recent GAO
report2
documented, the city needs ongoing assistance from the federal
government in addressing this structural imbalance.
I don't believe that there is such a thing as too many good educational
options for our children. Parents ought not be compelled to choose a
public school, a public charter school, or a private school solely by
default. In other words, we should strive for a situation where all the
city's educational assets complement each other and offer parents
positive choices beyond one-size-fits-all paradigms. I hope the Congress
will adopt - and fund - initiatives to make the city a national model of
public and private schools choices for urban education. We have the
opportunity - right now - to embrace a new vision for the education of
African-American, Latino, and lower-income children from all
backgrounds. Federally-Funded Scholarship Program
As I stated at the Committee on Government Reform hearing on May 9,
2003, I support the President's desire to create a scholarship program
in the District. I believe, if done effectively, such a program could
truly expand choice to low-income families, who currently do not have
the same freedom of choice enjoyed by more affluent families.
Understandably the issue of public support for private and parochial
school tuitions raises fierce emotions on both sides, but there is a
large body of research that speaks to its merits.
Dozens of studies, including those conducted by voucher opponents, have
confirmed that school vouchers increase parental satisfaction with their
child's school. Milwaukee, Cleveland, Florida, Maine and Vermont all
have some form of voucher program and, by and large, these programs have
been successful in increasing options for families. In addition, eight
rigorous studies of six cities by research teams including scholars from Harvard,
Princeton, the University of Chicago, Indiana University, the Brookings
Institution and the Manhattan Institute, have all confirmed that school
choice boosts the academic achievement of inner-city African-American
students. A recent study prepared by a team led by William G. Howell and
Patrick J. Wolf surveyed more than 1,000 African American students in
the District who attend nonpublic schools through support from the
Washington Scholarship Fund. These students gained almost 10 national
percentile points (NPR) in math and reading achievement after the first
year and an average of 6.3 NPR after two years of being in private
school.3 Finally, it has been proven that school choice increases
educational attainment; inner-city minority students are more likely to
obtain a college degree if they attend private or parochial school, when
compared with their public high school counterparts.4
I believe that any scholarship program for the District must recognize
the reality and needs of the city and must be crafted with full
participation of the city's elected leadership. I am grateful to
Chairman Davis and Secretary Paige for their willingness to collaborate
with us and accommodate many of our concerns in the course of drafting
the bill before us today. I feel strongly that the duly elected leaders
of our municipal government and others have a major role in designing a
program that works for us and our children. I have consulted with
several key education leaders and have engaged in focus groups and
discussions in order to develop consensus on what an effective
scholarship program should look like. Following are some key elements
that arose from those discussions, most of which are already reflected
in the draft bill before the committees:
-
focus on low-income parents. We propose a ceiling of 185% of the
Federal Poverty Level or perhaps more. We are pleased to see this
concept included in the draft bill under discussion today
-
emphasize opportunities for new students - those not currently in
nonpublic schools -- so that federal funds do not merely supplant
existing financial aid offered by other institutions. We are pleased
that the bill before us gives preference to students currently attending
low-performing public schools;
-
limit participation to schools in the District. We are pleased to
see this tenet is included in a bill introduced by Mr. Davis;
-
require schools to admit all eligible students and, in cases
where grades or schools were oversubscribed, admit students based on
lottery. The goal is not to "cream" the best and brightest
students, but rather to give the neediest children opportunities they
would otherwise not have. We are pleased that the draft bill does
establish a random selection process. Moreover Congressman Davis has
assured me that the final version of this bill will clearly reflect that
participating schools are prohibited from discriminating against
students on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, or
religion;
-
encompass a comprehensive accountability and evaluation component
that
would allow for solid longitudinal, data collection and analysis so that
years from now we can speak authoritatively about the relative success
of each of our educational approaches and their impact on student
achievement. The bill before us does establish a regime whereby the U.S.
Department of Education shall receive information for this purpose. The
city would like language added that would also grant the city access to
this information so that it might conduct a complementary, yet not
redundant study. This request would be consistent with the District's
ongoing efforts to strengthen our state-level oversight role with
respect to data collection and reporting on all of the schools in the
city;
-
additional supports to help families assess information, and
transition and adapt t0 private schools. The current bill does allow
for such support, but limits the source of funding to the three percent
administration set aside, which we fear may be too constrictive; and
-
a competitive bidding process to select a private or public entity
to administer the program. program. If a nonpublic entity is selected, the city
would like to have assurance that the leadership of the organization
include District elected officials and educational leaders or otherwise
ensure that the city has input as to how the program is administered.
Finally, I understand that there is a need for a distinct legislative
strategy that would authorize this new scholarship program, and that the
other two sectors may be better addressed through other legislative
vehicles. I am grateful that the Executive branch and key leadership in
the Congress are committed to the three-sector educational reform
effort. I look forward to working with them to ensure that support for
DCPS and charter schools are achieved by other means. Although the two
other sectors will follow another legislative track, I want to outline
briefly the nature of the need and support we are seeking. Permanent and Predictable Support for DCPS
Like many urban cities across the country, the District of Columbia has
suffered major increases in the cost of education. This is due, in part,
to spiraling special education costs, but is also related to the
continuing structural imbalance that plagues the District as documented
in the recent GAO report.5
The District of Columbia, with its limited tax base and limited taxing
authority can never achieve the fiscal parity that would support the
delivery of comparable state level services. However, the Department of
Education holds it accountable and measures the District for
effectiveness by the same yardsticks as its state counterparts.
In a comparative review of the amount of federal, state and local
revenue committed to elementary and secondary education in five states
with similar demographics as well as overall expenditures in the area of
education, it is important to note that the District bears an excessive
fiscal burden in supporting these mandates (see Table 1 below.) While
the state contribution ranged among this group from approximately thirty percent in Vermont to
sixty four percent in Delaware, all of the other states contribute
significantly to the available local dollars. In contrast, the District
bears the inordinate burden of an eighty three percent local
contribution.
Table 1: Comparison of Federal, State and Local Contributions among
Comparable State
State or other area |
Total |
Federal |
State |
Local and Intermediate |
Amount |
% of total |
Amount |
% of total |
Amount |
% of total |
Delaware |
$913,615,548 |
$69,240,402 |
7.6 |
$588,210,603 |
64.4 |
$243,784,465 |
26.7 |
District of Columbia |
$706,935,000 |
$116,363,000 |
16.5 |
--- |
--- |
$587,111,055 |
83.1 |
North Dakota |
$682,418,716 |
$84,339,151 |
12.4 |
$280,238,399 |
41.1 |
$280,741,500 |
41.1 |
South Dakota |
$794,255,517 |
$79,521,966 |
10.0 |
$282,517,823 |
35.6 |
$408,047,256 |
51.4 |
Vermont |
$861,642,698 |
$44,751,668 |
5.2 |
$253,572,082 |
29.4 |
$547,924,359 |
63.6 |
Wyoming |
$702,001,318 |
$47,202,685 |
6.7 |
$330,208,062 |
47.0 |
$312,642,835 |
44.5 |
Average |
$776,811,466 |
$73,569,812 |
10 |
$346,949,394 |
43 |
$396,708,578 |
52 |
* This table includes states with comparable total revenues and
populations to the District of Columbia.
Additional
support from the federal government, whether in the form of state level
cost assumption or investments in academic achievement, would help address
this imbalance and free up local resources to make needed investments in
our public schools. New federal dollars could be targeted to those
activities that would build infrastructure and increase capacity to serve
both general education students and students with special needs.
Charter Schools Facilities
The 12,000 students
in the public charter schools of Washington, DC learn in a variety of
facilities of varying and often inadequate size and quality.
Unfortunately, there are major challenges for charter schools in securing
facilities that inhibit high quality teaching and learning. We hope the
federal government can help with funding for restructuring existing
facilities and provide equity for a non-profit organization to purchase
and renovate the facilities on behalf of the charter schools. I look
forward to your support for this innovative approach to solving the
facilities needs of our charter schools.
Conclusion
Finally, Chairman
Davis, as we know, emotions run high on the issue of federal funding for
private school scholarships in Washington, DC. Leaders from both major
political parties have weighed in. Advocates and scholars from around the
country have opined about what it best or not for our children. Even media
markets in China have picked up this story. For me, the issue is more
localized. I am not accountable to anyone with an ideological agenda. I am
accountable to the students and parents in my city who all yearn for and
deserve the same thing - - our confidence in their ability to make the
right educational choices if given the opportunity.
I am pleased that the
President and members of Congress are keenly interested in helping us
expand choices for our families. I do not know whether private school
scholarships are the right answer nationally, or if they will be the
appropriate for the District in ten years. I do believe that along with
the ongoing reform of our traditional public school system and our
burgeoning charter school movement, they are valuable elements in giving
hope to many parents who seek a quality education in our nation's capital.
I hope one day to
share' with you a glorious dilemma. A mother who comes to me and says,
"Mayor, I don't know what to do. Do I apply for a scholarship? Do I
enroll my child in a new innovative charter school? Or do I enroll my
child in a specialized math, science, or foreign language program at my
neighborhood DCPS school?"
Thank you Mr.
Chairman and members for your continued support of the District of
Columbia.
1.
The Mayor and the Council have increased funding to public education by
approximately 40% since 1997.
2.
"District of Columbia: Structural Imbalance and Management Issues. GAO-03-666
May 22, 2003." 3.
Howell et al, "School Vouchers and Academic Performance..."
op. cit.; see also William G. Howell and Paul E. Peterson, with Patrick
J. Wolf and David E. Campbell, The Education Gap: Vouchers and Urban
Schools (Washington: Brookings, 2002), pp. 150-52.
4.
Derek Neal, "The Effects of Catholic Secondary Schooling on
Educational Achievement," Journal of Labor Economics 15:1,
1997.
5.
"District of Columbia: Structural Imbalance and Management Issues. GAO-03-666
May 22, 2003." |