 |
There were 735 low-performing schools and 23 low-performing school districts during the 2023-24 school year, according to an annual report presented to the State Board of Education on Wednesday.
There are 69 fewer low-performing schools than last school year and two fewer low-performing districts. On Wednesday, the Department of Public Instruction’s (DPI) Dr. Jeremy Gibbs presented the report to the Board, and discussed the state’s future efforts to continue supporting low-performing schools and districts.
“Where do we go from here, and how can we continue to build out effective ways of supporting out schools and districts in their improvement journey?” asked Gibbs, DPI’s deputy state superintendent of the division of district and school support services.
In 2021, CARES was launched as the “the highest level of intervention” within DPI for low-performing schools. The intervention program helped to identify what causes challenges in low-performing schools and to intervene with support to bolster the school’s achievements and performance.
Last March, Gibbs told the Board that DPI’s goal was “to continue and refine ongoing support efforts to low-performing districts and schools beyond September 30, 2024.” At that point — when ESSER funding ran out — funding for CARES programming also ended.
The CARES model included professional learning, coaching, systems design, and capacity building. This short session, DPI asked lawmakers for a $4.5 million grant “to continue targeted support for improvement in low-performing schools beyond October 1, 2024.” So far, the General Assembly has not funded that request.
Currently, support for these schools and districts largely includes feedback on school improvement plans and customized support from DPI’s Office of Regional Support Services.
On Wednesday, Gibbs said DPI’s goal is to build an “initial theory of action” at the Board’s planning and work session next month for what future support will look like. From there, the Board will work to make recommendations to the General Assembly regarding policies and support for low-performing schools and districts moving forward.
Gibbs said DPI hopes to streamline supports and requirements for schools and districts. Some focus areas for the future include intentional continuous improvement, capacity building, self-efficacy and empowerment, and sustainability and simplicity.
“I certainly want us to think about, what is the bandwidth and capability of the teacher in the classroom and the principal in the school?” Gibbs said. “…What can we think differently about? What can we streamline and simplify?”
As a reminder, here are the state’s definitions for low-performing schools and districts:
- Low-Performing School: A low-performing school has a School Performance Grade of “D” or “F” and a growth status of “Met” or “Not Met.”
- Low-Performing District: Low-performing districts are defined as districts that have greater than 50% of schools identified as low performing.
- Continually Low-Performing School: A school that is identified as low performing in any two of the last three years. This definition also applies to charter schools.
In addition to the state’s definitions, North Carolina public schools and DPI must also pay attention to federal designations, which Gibbs said sometimes overlap and disagree.
Under the federal designation, for example, North Carolina has 582 TSI-Additional Targeted Support Schools — 153 fewer schools than identified based on state policy. Federal designations do come with some federal funding for “School Improvement Agency Personnel.” Per DPI, this year there is $3.7 million in personnel support from federal funding, and $1.2 million from state funds.
“Looking forward, (let us) think about and have this Board and policymakers really pull this apart and say, ‘What is the utility in having two different designations?'” Gibbs said. “And how does that support school improvement, and the teachers and the principals that are making these schools run, by having these multiple layers of designation?”
DPI is still waiting for an external evaluation of CARES, Gibbs said, and hopes to have that evaluation ahead of the Board’s December meeting.
On Thursday, the Board voted to approve the annual report as an “interim” report, with language signaling to the General Assembly that the Board will submit formal recommendations soon.
“This is not the last conversation, nor the last report,” Chair Eric Davis said. “I have no doubt that given his extensive and successful experience in turning around schools in Guilford County, that the next (state) superintendent will have deep ideas, effective solutions and recommendations for us to consider in improving that — because the number one goal of this Board is to improve the performance of our students.”
You can view DPI’s full presentation on low-performing schools here, and its annual report to the General Assembly here.
Cellphone use in schools
The Board’s November meeting also included a brief discussion about cellphone use in schools.
State Superintendent Catherine Truitt raised the issue during her report to the Board, highlighting a Sept. 12 convening she attended regarding the topic.
The convening, hosted by the Friday Institute for Educational Innovation, focused on making policies to regulate phone use rather than a total ban.
“When we ban things, we create groups,” Truitt said at the event. “We create groups who are in favor and those who oppose, and then we often attach some sort of morality to that… This is why bans are so problematic. This needs to not be about banning cellphones. It needs to be about creating policies that are right for students and their families and teachers, so that our students can thrive.”
On Thursday, Truitt reiterated her opposition to a statewide ban, arguing instead that local school districts can make policies to limit cellphone use in the classroom.
She shared key takeaways from the convening, including that internet and cellphones are reshaping society and education, and there is evidence they are impacting student mental health.
“So how can we move forward with the use of cellphones in school in a way that does not harm students, but is also not punitive or taking away from the fact that, for better or for worse, cellphones are not going away, and the technology is only going to increase,” Truitt said.
According to the Pew Research Center, about one-third of K-12 teachers in public schools consider distractions from cellphones a major problem in the classroom, with another 20% calling it a minor problem. Nearly three-fourths of high school teachers (72%) say cellphone use is a major problem, according to the data.
However, many parents and guardians want their students to be able to have phones in schools, Truitt said.
“In general, parents are not in favor of cellphone bans. I can tell you that I probably text my son at school at least once a day to make sure that we’re on the same page for after school practice and who’s picking up whom, and when are we going to be home, etc,” she said. “But what’s interesting is that parents are starting to differentiate that they can see a path forward for children having phones at schools, but not in classrooms.”
Truitt advocated for coming to a consensus about how to limit cellphone use in the classroom, without making people “choose sides” regarding a ban.
Student advisor Ian House thanked Truitt for raising the issue, and said that in his experience, cellphones can distract from collaboration and learning, while also being a “vehicle of obnoxious behavior.”
“I hope whatever solution is crafted is sustainable and can fight against the persistence of students trying to get around it,” House said.
The Board is expected to discuss the topic again at its December planning meeting.
Hurricane Helene support
Truitt’s report also included an update on how DPI is providing support to school districts impacted by Hurricane Helene.
Currently, the state estimates about $85 million in damage to schools. The General Assembly’s second relief bill included $50 million toward repair and renovation of impacted facilities, for damage not covered by insurance or federal aid.
Truitt said DPI is still working with local districts to know what damage is not funded by that state and federal aid, insurance, and private funding.
Similarly, Truitt said DPI is also working to see how much additional support most-impacted districts will need, in addition to the $5 million for mental health services.
According to the second relief bill, DPI must determine the amount to be allocated to each eligible public school unit by allocating each an initial amount of $30,000, then distributing the remaining funds on the basis of allotted average daily membership (ADM).
“We know that there are counties that are going to need more than what they’re going to get from this allotment,” Truitt said. “We anticipate making a very specific ask to the legislature around this area in time for the November 19 return to session.”
The Board also approved several policies for schools and districts impacted by Helene:
- For DPI to request consideration to waive some of the federal requirements specified in Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). While impacted schools will still take end-of-course exams, DPI wants to exempt them from the academic consequences of lower scores this semester.
- In recognition of the impact of Hurricane Helene on western North Carolina, for the 2024-25 school year only, any public school unit located in a county that was designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as a major disaster area as of Sept. 28, 2024, may offer mid-year promotion to any student who has demonstrated reading proficiency on the Read to Achieve assessment by Jan. 15, 2025.
- For the 2024-25 school year only, DPI is recommending modification to policy CTED-003 for students enrolled in a CTE work-based learning course for credit (CTED-003). This policy requires students to get a minimum of 120 hours of on-the-job or work-based experience to receive credit. The amendment allows students to “to satisfy this requirement through participation in related disaster response or recovery activities, subject to the approval of the PSU.”
Multiple Board members expressed continued support for districts impacted by Helene and gratitude to the people, districts, and organizations aiding in recovering efforts.
Dr. Marvin Connelly Jr., 2024 A. Craig Phillips NC Superintendent of the Year, highlighted recent efforts to support Buncombe County School’s return to school.
Last week, 53 school districts sent 263 school counselors and social workers to support the return of students and educators in Buncombe County after Helene.
“It takes an entire village to raise a child,” Board member Wendell Hall said. “When we reach out to each other with no boundaries, I get choked up even thinking about it. … When you stop and look at it, that’s what it’s all about — us taking advantage of the things that we can do to make a better day.”
NIL, remote academies, and more
The Board is moving ahead with allowing North Carolina public school athletes to monetize their NIL (name, image, and likeness), following a court order issued in October by a Wake County Superior Court Judge.
On Thursday, the Board voted to formally propose a new temporary rule that codifies the court order. The proposed rule also adds more wording on NIL guidelines.
There will be a public comment period from Nov. 15 to Dec. 10, and a virtual public hearing on Dec. 6. The Board is set to adopt the rule on Jan. 9, per Board meeting documents, with an effective date of Feb. 13 or sooner. You can read the new rule here.
The Board also approved its 2023-24 report to the General Assembly on remote academies.
The report shows that remote academies perform at a lower rate than traditional schools.
While noting that school performance grades are not a perfect metric, Davis raised concern about the performance of remote academies.
“For all of the benefits of virtual education, we are also aware of the limitations,” Davis said, noting the negative impact of remote instruction on most students during the height of the pandemic.
Finally, the Board also honored Dr. Lynn Harvey, DPI’s senior director of school nutrition and auxiliary services, for more than 35 years of service.
The full Board meets next for its biannual planning and work session Dec. 3-5.
