[M]ore neurological development occurs by the age of 4 than in the rest of a person’s life – and impoverished toddlers are at special risk of receiving limited brain stimulation. Children unable to read by third grade are unlikely to graduate high school, and will cost society dearly in increased social service costs.

That’s the argument Senator Jeff Smith (D-SD4) used to try to persuade the state Senate to accept his amendment to a bill Charlie Shields (R-SD34) was sponsoring that would require the state to rate the quality of pre-schools. Smith’s amendment offers free pre-school to three and four year olds if the family earns less than 130 percent of poverty and if the family lives in an unaccredited school district (there are three in the St. Louis area–SLPS, Wellston, Riverview Gardens–and one in Wyaconda in northeast Missouri). The proposal, which would cost the state about $5 million a year, aims to help 1250 children a year come to kindergarten prepared to read, so that they’ll be set on a path to success.

The debate lasted several hours, with the opposition arguing that the St. Louis Public Schools have failed at managing their budget and at achieving decent academic goals. Their dropout rate is abysmal, so some legislators feel the district should not be rewarded for its incompetence. Smith argued that we’ve unaccredited the district; now we need to give those children a helping hand.

He says that when the Senate prepared to vote:

I breathed a sigh of relief as I looked around the room and saw several allies in their seats. But then, even though the “Ayes” seemed louder than the “No’s”, the chair called the vote for the “No’s”. I quickly rose to request a roll-call vote, which Democrats (outnumbered 20-14) often dread, because senators often look to the bill sponsor [in this case, Shields] for guidance before voting on amendments, and because important roll-call votes usually fall along party lines. Sen. Shields had told me only that he “wouldn’t fight” the amendment – vague enough to leave open the option of voting against without speaking against it. This also did not necessarily preclude the frequently-employed but barely perceptible shake of the head (if another senator were to seek guidance).

But in the end, though my amendment significantly increased the cost of the bill and was thus opposed by the influential Appropriations Chair, Sen. Shields voted yes (along with every Democrat and 7 Republicans), and the amendment prevailed 21-7. I plan to work with Sen. Shields to help shepherd the bill through the House, though its prospects are uncertain.

The problem with getting it through the House is that a bill requiring a quality rating system for pre-schools failed there last year. If the House passes it this time, the funds for the pre-school program will be divided between public schools and non-sectarian community-based early childhood centers–for two reasons.

The first is that a previous bill offering free pre-school to poor children in Kansas City had the unintended consequence of driving some community-based pre-schools out of business. Furthermore, the St. Louis Public Schools do not even have the space and slots available to effectively use all of the money. And besides, diverting half of the money to private early child care centers helped appease some of those who feel that giving the SLPS such a reward is throwing good money after bad.

None of those who voted Aye will still be in the Senate when St. Louis and Wyaconda begin reaping the rewards of Smith’s vision fifteen years hence. Those 21 senators, nevertheless, voted for the long term. Perhaps the House, as well, will see the wisdom of leaving such a legacy.    

State senator Jeff Smith (D-St. Louis) is intent on improving the city’s public schools.  Jeff has plans.  Whether he can get all or any of them enacted by a Republican legislature remains to be seen, but he’s been doing his homework, so to speak, and his plans are based on talking to a wide range of people. 

He talks to St. Louis Public Schools principals, to the teachers’ union, to the head of the appointed board, Rick Sullivan, to educational experts from across the nation, such as leaders of groups like Public Impact and the Education Trust.  He has visited some 38 schools in the city this year, usually unannounced, and guided his own tours through them to spare himself any dog and pony shows.  Jeff wants to know what reality looks like in St. Louis city schools, so that he can best plan how to improve them.

He intends to introduce a bill that would  mandate a number of new programs in districts that are unaccredited or provisionally accredited.  Here’s a sampling:
 

• Free child care would be available for children between three years old and kindergarten who qualify for reduced price lunches.
• Students would stay with the same teacher for two-three years.  Since ten percent of St. Louis city students are homeless, such a program would help a teacher get to know students.  It would add stability and foster relationships that might help keep kids in school.
• Teachers could opt into a voluntary pay for performance program.  Their pay would be partially based on their students’ progress.  Such teachers would give up tenure protection while in the program in exchange for the chance to make, say, one and a  half times their usual pay if their students averaged one and a half year’s progress in a year.  (The program would be funded by a one million dollar state pilot program.)  This program is modeled after one used in Denver, where the overwhelming majority of teachers signed up for it.

To address the severe shortage of teachers in certain subject areas, such as math science, and English as a second language, Jeff is recommending three programs:

• ABCTE certifies teachers without education courses if they pass a competency exam in their content area.  Of course it would be preferable to have fully certified teachers, but Jeff figures it’s better to at least have teachers who understand math teaching math.  Some of them will, no doubt, be poor at communicating with students while others will do well even without education courses.  At least, with this program, half the students have a chance at getting a teacher who can teach them math or science.
• $5000 bonuses would be offered for teachers in the areas of the most acute shortages.  The teachers’ union objects to this provision as well as to the ABCTE program, and Jeff understands their point that all teachers should be compensated as well as possible (and trained adequately).  But students are drawing the short straw as far as instruction in math and science, and that deficiency must be remedied.
• In order to be sure that teachers know the subject matter well enough to teach it, they would be required, every five years, to pass–with 60 percent competency–a test in their subject area.  If they fail, they could retake it within three months.  Jeff believes that 60 percent competency is not asking too much.  (As a retired teacher myself, I agree.  If a teacher doesn’t know that much, he should be gone.)

In addition to the legislation he’s proposing, Jeff also hopes to encourage Rick Sullivan to do everything possible to involve parents.  And knowing that many poor parents have reasons to take little interest in visiting schools (such as working two jobs or never having been that fond of school themselves), he is urging Sullivan to try two ideas to get parents to parent nights: 

• Approach local corporations to sponsor such nights.  For a couple of thousand dollars, they could put out food at ten schools to make it easier and more appealing for busy parents to get there.
• Offer programs for the parents in addition to information about what their children are doing in school.  Such programs might include home repair instruction,  information about tax preparation or help in job interviewing skills.

Jeff’s heart is in the right place as far as helping the city schools, but that doesn’t necessarily mean everyone in the community backs him.  The teachers’ union is unhappy with some of his ideas, and he took a lot of flak last spring by not opposing the state takeover of the city schools.  Some of his constituents are still upset about that. 

All he can say to his critics is that as he investigates what should be done to help failing school districts, he finds himself to be less of an ideologue and more of a pragmatist.  The state takeover was pretty much inevitable, and he wants to work effectively with those in charge.  (And besides, he sees Sullivan spending a lot of time listening to all points of view about what the city schools need.)

Those who don’t always agree with him will at least grant, I hope, that he’s working his tail off to do an effective job in a dire situation. 

When is withdrawing a nominee’s name not withdrawing his name?

Governor Blunt at least appeared to withdraw Rick Sullivan as head of the SLPS Special Administrative Board (SAB) and Derio Gambaro, former state rep., as a member of the state School Board when Blunt sent a letter to the senate Wednesday of last week, saying:

“I hereby withdraw from your consideration the following appointments to office submitted to you on August 20, 2007 for your advice and consent…”.

Sullivan and Gambaro were on that list.

At the time most SAB watchers assumed the governor was withdrawing Sullivan’s name because he knew he didn’t have the senate votes necessary for confirmation.  If the senators voted against Sullivan, then he’d be out for good.  This way, the governor could simply reappoint Sullivan after the session ended.  People thought.

But that’s not, apparently, how Blunt sees the situation.  As far as he’s concerned, he didn’t withdraw their names; he only withdrew their names from consideration by the senate.  As far as Blunt is concerned, they still are, just as they have been all summer, his recess appointments.  He just figured he could bypass that pesky senate vote and leave the men in office.

Diana Bourisaw indicated, in effect, that that was Blunt’s thinking, when she issued this statement:

“Rick Sullivan’s appointment to the Special Administrative Board remains in effect. Reports indicating that Governor Blunt withdrew Mr. Sullivan’s appointment are unfounded. The district will continue with business as usual. The next meeting of the Special Administrative Board is Thursday, September 6, at 6 p.m.”

But Machiavelli may be about to trip over the Pink Panther’s feet because the Missouri constitution specifies:

If the senate is not in session, the authority to act shall commence immediately upon appointment by the governor but shall terminate if the advice and consent of the senate is not given within thirty days after the senate has convened in regular or special session. If the senate fails to give its advice and consent to any appointee, that person shall not be reappointed by the governor to the same office or position.

In other words, if the recess nominee doesn’t get senate approval within thirty days of the special session, he is out.  For good.  That’s what the constitution says, Mr. Blunt.

If the governor had really withdrawn their names and then reappointed them, they’d be good to go, legally, until the Senate votes next January–by which time the Blunt camp hopes to have the necessary votes.  (There is question as to whether Joan Bray and Jeff Smith will use their pocket vetoes at that time to kill the nominations of the two men.  They say they haven’t decided.  Senate president Michael Gibbons avers that he would abide by their vetoes if they chose not to support Gambaro and Sullivan.)

But this nomination that appeared to be withdrawn–but really wasn’t?–now that could create legal havoc down the line, opening the gate for lawsuits challenging the legality of anything the SAB does in the next four months.

Gibbons understands what the constitution has to say about the matter and has said that the governor needs to reappoint the two men.  Perhaps he can get that notion through the governor’s skull.  Because, as it stands, Inspector Matt Clouseau may think he’s Machiavelli, but …cue Pink Panther music.

Thanks to W. Purdy for the information on which this posting is based.