Chicago’s plan to tutor poor students in failing schools apparently violates federal law and undermines the intent of a reform designed to give children educational alternatives, a top Washington official says.
The sweeping No Child Left Behind Act mandates that sub-par school districts contract with tutors to work with struggling students.
But in another example of how far implementation of the law has strayed from early expectations, the Chicago Public Schools system is planning to provide tutors from among its own teachers, at twice the average industry cost, and bar private companies from tutoring on school grounds.
The Illinois State Board of Education approved the plan.
A top official with the U.S. Department of Education said last week that Chicago’s plan defeats part of the act intended to bring in outside help.
“Unless [the state] can give us convincing evidence, we do not think it is appropriate that Chicago should be certified to provide tutoring,” said Eugene Hickok, undersecretary of education, who is charged with overseeing the law. “In essence, we [would be] saying, `Well, let’s see, the school district didn’t provide adequate education for students, but let’s label them a supplier of tutoring services and then pay them some more money because they didn’t get it right the first time.'”
Hickok said federal officials will talk with state board officials and might ask them to decertify the city for tutoring. They could also withdraw some state administrative funds, though Hickok said he does not expect it to go that far.
State board officials contend the law allows Chicago to serve as a provider. Chicago officials agree and argue they are best equipped to help students in academically troubled schools.
“We are fulfilling the law the way we read it,” said Phil Hansen, chief accountability officer for Chicago Public Schools. “We feel our plan can improve student performance.”
The confusion about the tutoring program is the latest in a series of controversies over the implementation of President Bush’s education bill, the most sweeping education reform in at least a decade.
Critics charge that state and local districts are disregarding key provisions of the bill. Districts, for example, have largely avoided a requirement that they bus students who want to transfer from failing schools into better ones. In Illinois, the vast majority of the 170,000 students who attend low-performing schools weren’t even offered the chance to move. Less than one percent ended up transferring.
“Chicago has been the poster child for setting up obstacles to this law, and it seems like this tutoring plan may be just another example of that,” said Neal McCluskey of the Center for Education Reform, a critic of the law’s implementation.
Under the federal law, private companies, religious institutions, schools and districts are eligible to run tutoring. State officials must approve providers. High-poverty districts are given millions of dollars to pay for tutoring services of a parent’s choosing.
The law specifically bars low-performing districts from operating supplemental service programs such as tutoring, but high-performing schools within that district can do so.
“Frankly, the spirit of the supplemental services provision is to get beyond the traditional provider,” Hickok said.
Chicago’s rationale for providing the services itself turns on the interpretation of an older federal education law. That 1994 law mandated that states identify districts that repeatedly failed to make “adequate progress” on state exams.
Like many of their state counterparts, Illinois officials ignored the law and never designated a single district, even though Chicago would have landed on the list under the state’s definition. And because the district was never declared failing, state officials say Chicago now qualifies as a supplemental services provider.
The Chicago plan would offer students in the worst-performing schools a chance to enroll in after-school programs at better, nearby schools. Teachers in the higher-performing school would receive overtime pay as tutors. Students as young as 1st graders would have to find their own transportation to the tutoring site.
“We can provide a continuum of services directly related to the major initiatives the system already has launched, such as our reading, math and science initiatives,” said Hansen, who will leave the city schools next month to take a job with the State Board, where he will oversee compliance in Chicago.
But on paper, the Chicago plan is by far the most expensive. The 12 private companies approved by the state plan to charge an average of $24 an hour per student for small-group tutoring sessions.
The original plan submitted by Chicago would cost $60 to $100 an hour per student. The district altered the plan after state officials said its pricing was out of line compared with other vendors, reducing the rate to $45 to $60 per hour.
Hansen said the city will not allow private companies to use school facilities.
“It’s competition. If we have an advantage, such as school buildings, we should take advantage of that,” Hansen said.
