By most measures, Franklin Park School District 84 in west suburban Cook County is a success.
Roughly 70 percent of its students passed state achievement exams last year. All four of its schools met–and in most cases overwhelmingly surpassed–the testing standards of the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Its class sizes are smaller than average.
But the 1,300-pupil system suddenly finds itself in a peculiar and unenviable position, labeled as a troubled district by the federal government. And if things did not improve on the most recent round of state testing, high-flying Franklin Park–and hundreds of other districts in Illinois–will face a series of sanctions that eventually could lead to state takeover.
Since the No Child Left Behind reform was passed two years ago, the focus has been mainly on individual schools. But this year, for the first time, the state has made public a list of districts that are failing.
According to data recently released, more than half of the state’s districts–454 out of 891–failed to measure up last year and will face sanctions if test results do not improve on the soon-to-be released state report card.
The list includes such perennial all-stars as New Trier High School District 203, Lake Forest School District 67 and Hinsdale Elementary District 181–all of which failed to test enough students to meet the federal requirement, according to the state data.
Many districts, including Franklin Park District 84, were tripped up by the performance of special education students.
About 180 districts are in the same boat as Franklin Park: Every one of their schools met the testing standards, but the district did not.
More Top Picks What Is Orton Gillingham And How Does It Help Dyslexia
The story is much the same across the nation, where some of the best-regarded school districts are being tripped up by nuances of the complicated and controversial federal education reform. Their inclusion on the list of troubled districts is inflaming the debate already raging over the law, which some educators and lawmakers argue is deeply flawed and focuses too much on testing.
In Illinois, nearly 60 percent of districts either have run afoul of the law or have a school that has done so.
“I don’t know if this will be the tipping point, but it presents a strong argument that the law must be reviewed and changed,” Jack Jennings, director of the Center for Education Policy, a Washington research group, said about the labeling of districts and the ensuing sanctions. “This might just be where people start drawing the line in the sand.”
Chicago Public Schools chief Arne Duncan already has drawn his line. He has threatened to defy the portion of the law that bars troubled districts like his from overseeing federally mandated tutoring programs for children in low-performing schools.
“It infuriates me when bureaucrats in Washington make laws and set rules that make no sense and, in the end, harm kids,” Duncan said. “The way this law is being implemented creates disincentives and discourages those who are trying to do the right thing. It is wrong morally and intellectually, and it harms public education.”
Doug Mesecar, deputy chief of staff for policy at the U.S. Department of Education, argues that the law is working exactly as intended.
“The whole idea of the law is that no child is left behind,” Mesecar said. “For decades, you’ve had a lot of kids who were shuffled through the system, their scores hidden in group averages. Now we are insisting that someone be held accountable for every student, whether it’s the school or the district.”
The sweeping No Child Left Behind law requires states to track separately how well minority, low-income, limited-English and special education students perform on state achievement exams. Each subgroup must meet state standards in math and reading, and 95 percent of students in each subgroup must be tested.
The law lays out a series of escalating sanctions for schools that fail to measure up, beginning with a requirement that they allow students to transfer to better schools and ending with possible closure.
Although every school in Illinois is held to the same standard and risks placement on the failure list, the federal sanctions apply only to schools that accept federal poverty money. About 62 percent of Illinois schools get poverty money.
Each state is allowed to decide how large a subgroup must be before it is counted as such. Some states have set the number as low as 20 students, others as high as 100. In Illinois, a subgroup must have at least 40 students. If, for example, a school has only 39 Asian students, the school does not have to ensure that this so-called subgroup meets the testing requirements.
So far, the tough standard has been applied only to individual schools across Illinois.
Now, however, districts are being held to those same standards, and the expansion of the subgroup rule is snaring many of the state’s best.
Take the Franklin Park district, for example. All four of its schools have special education students, but no school has 40 or more–the threshold for consideration as a subgroup. As a result, no individual school can be penalized if its special education students don’t meet the state goals.
But adding the special education students across the district brings the total to 52, qualifying them as a subgroup within the district.
In 2002-03, about 12 percent of Franklin Park’s special education students passed the state reading exam, falling far below the required 37 percent.
If the scores did not improve on the 2003-04 tests, the results of which are expected to be released within the next month or so, Franklin Park will land on the federal “needs improvement” list.
Franklin Park Supt. David Nemec said he was surprised when state officials told him in August that his district had run afoul of the law.
“Mathematically I can see how this would occur, but realistically I am puzzled that they would put our district on a list of districts that are in trouble,” Nemec said. “This is going to confuse parents, and I’m not sure that putting us on a list of districts that are in trouble gives a true picture of how well our schools are doing.” A Tribune analysis of the state data shows that the biggest stumbling block for districts was the performance of special education students. Of the 400 districts that had enough special education students to total a subgroup, nearly three-quarters of them failed to meet the state testing standards in special education reading.
Howard Butters, superintendent of Manhattan School District 114 in Will County, argues that it is unfair to label districts as subpar when only a small portion of one subgroup failed state exams. Both schools in his district met the testing standards, but the district failed overall, based on the reading scores of special education students.
“For students to receive special education services, they have to at least be performing two years below grade level,” Butters said. “And then to expect that those children are going to be able to perform on the state’s assessment at grade level, I just find that ludicrous.”
Though the federal sanctions apply only to districts that receive federal poverty money, the state has companion rules that basically mirror the federal ones.
A district that fails to meet standards two years in a row must create an improvement plan laying out how the district will fix the problems that led to the student failure. Districts that get federal poverty money–about 90 percent of Illinois’ districts have a school that qualifies for poverty money–must set aside a portion of that money for teacher professional development.
Most troubling to some subpar districts, however, is the provision that bars them from overseeing tutoring programs in failing schools.
No Child Left Behind requires districts to offer free tutoring to students who attend schools that repeatedly fail. By law, parents can opt for private tutoring at the expense of the district. But many districts, including Chicago and Cicero, set up tutoring programs last year after the private companies could not handle the flow of students.
Now, officials with the U.S. Department of Education are warning that these districts will have to dismantle their tutoring programs if the upcoming test scores do not show marked improvement.
More Top Picks Best Refractor Telescopes For Astrophotography
“If that’s what they plan to do then I say, `Fine, give me a better alternative,'” said Edward Aksamit, superintendent of the Cicero school district.
“Either we provide this tutoring or no one provides it. If the federal government thinks it’s better to have no tutoring, then I think it’s another example of how ridiculous this law can be.”
Angela Frangias, who tutors 2nd graders at Schubert Elementary School in Chicago, said the program is vital.
“We have a lot of special education students, and a lot of students who are simply having a hard time, who really benefit from this extra help,” said Frangias, who tutors 13 students. “If they close us down, I’m afraid that these kids won’t get the help they need.”