Trenton Abbott Indicators Summary Report 3 Trenton

tracking progress engaging communities Abbott Indicators Summary Report

Trenton new jersey

EDUCATION LAW CENTER

SPRING 2005

tracking progress engaging communities Abbott Indicators Summary Report

Trenton new jersey

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

Contents

1 Introduction 17 3. K-12 Education 33 Student Achievement 2 Trenton Abbott Indicators Project 18 Abbott Overview 39 High School Completion and Report 18 Opportunities for Students to Learn 41 Routes to Graduation 18 Class Size 5 1. The Community and Students 18 Programs for Children with Disabilities 43 4. School Facilities Construction 19 College Preparatory Classes 44 Abbott Overview 9 2. The Preschool Program 20 Student and Family Supports 44 The First-Round Long-Range 10 Abbott Overview 20 Early Literacy Facilities Plans 10 Opportunities for Students to Learn 21 Parent Involvement 45 Leadership 10 Program Enrollment 22 Access to Technology 45 Facilities Advisory Board 11 Programs for Children with Disabilities 22 Alternative Education and Dropout 45 Progress and Challenges 12 Curriculum Prevention 45 Progress 12 Program Quality 23 K-12 Teacher Qualifi cations and 46 Challenges 12 Preschool Teacher Qualifi cations and Supports Supports 23 Highly Qualifi ed Teachers 48 Next Steps for Education Stakeholders 12 Educational Attainment of Preschool 25 Staffi ng Patterns Teachers 26 K-12 Budget 49 Appendices 13 Preschool Teacher Certifi cation 26 General Education Funding 50 Abbott Indicators List 13 Preschool Teacher Salary 27 Supplemental Programs Funding 54 District and Community Reviewer 14 Preschool Budget 28 K-12 Leadership Letters 14 Preschool Leadership 28 School Leadership Councils 55 Acknowledgements 15 Preschool Student Outcomes 29 Abbott Advisory Council 58 About The Education Law Center 29 K-12 Student Outcomes 30 Student Attendance 30 Child and Youth Well-Being 31 School Safety

ii TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

Introduction

Public education helps today’s children prepare for an adulthood when they can take meaningful roles in soci- ety, compete in the labor market, and contribute as members of their communities. All of New Jersey’s children and youth have a constitutional right to a “thorough and efﬁ cient” free public education.

This represents our state’s promise to all children and youth that they will receive an education that at least equips students with the knowledge and skills to meet the state’s academic standards. Until all of New Jersey’s children receive the same high-quality education, this constitutional promise is not realized. TRENTON

Introduction

Several years ago, education stakeholders We wrote this report with Trenton’s edu- recognized that children did not receive the cation stakeholders in mind. The report is a same education throughout our state. Urban tool to help them identify and support what and suburban school districts did not have is working and ensure that remaining chal- the same resources to support their schools. lenges are overcome. The goal of an equally Thanks to the efforts of education profes- sound education for all New Jersey students sionals, parents, and advocates, the state is reachable with their continued support and legislature now provides the lowest income commitment. cities with the same funding as the wealthi-

est suburbs to support general education. Trenton Abbott Indicators Project and Report The poorest urban school districts are also required to undergo a series of reforms and Trenton is one of 31 urban school districts in improvements to ensure that the funds are New Jersey known as Abbott districts. The used to fulfi ll the constitutional promise. name comes from a series of lawsuits, col- Who should support these reforms and lectively known as Abbott v. Burke, in which the ensure that the schools continue to improve? New Jersey Supreme Court directed the state Everyone who cares about public education. to implement a series of interlocking remedies Schools belong fi rst to the community and designed to provide children with a thorough everyone in the community has a stake in and effi cient education.1 them. Parents want their children to have the As an Abbott district, Trenton receives best education possible. Homeowners and funding to equalize its per student general businesses support public education through education budget with the most success- taxes. Community members want to be sure ful suburban school districts in the state. that their collective investment is used wisely Trenton’s young people are also entitled to and effectively to educate the children. universal, high-quality preschool; reforms to

2 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

Introduction

help them meet the state’s rigorous standards This is a summary version of the full figure A for academic achievement in Kindergarten Trenton Abbott Indicators Report. In it, we through Grade 12; safe, healthy, and educa- ﬁ rst list indicators about Trenton as a com- Abbott v. Burke: New Jersey’s Framework for Urban School Improvement tionally adequate school facilities; and many munity and the students who are enrolled in other programs and services to ensure that the public schools. The remaining ﬁ ndings they come to school ready to learn. Through are organized by Abbott remedy: preschool, orm Parity a series of indicators, the Trenton Abbott K-12 education (including standards-based Ref Fu d nd se in Indicators Report presents the status of these reform and supports for students and fami- Ba g s rd reforms and student progress to date. lies), and school facilities construction. All of a d n a S The Trenton Abbott Indicators Report the remedies we have in place in New Jersey t t S u

d 2 e and three others we are releasing this year in are intended to work together to ensure a 1 n - t

K a Camden, Newark, and Union City are prod- seamless plan for school improvement. They n

ucts of the Abbott Indicators Project at the are presented separately because they have m

l y

Education Law Center. The report is written distinctive logics and requirements. S

r u

e p

for a wide audience: everyone with a stake in The indicators cover a broad range of s p c o

h r

o t o s public education in Trenton. The project goals topics about school practices and a number l

n are to: of student outcomes. We break down school io ct 1. Inform people in Trenton about the status of tru practices into six “elements of effective Sc ons school improvement efforts and student out- hool Facilities C 2 comes. schooling.” Ultimately, maximizing op- 2. Engage people in Trenton in exploring and portunities for students to learn is the main discussing what is working and what still needs focus of school improvement efforts. Other to be done. elements of effective schooling are needed 3. Develop and put a plan into action that supports school improvement. to provide students with these opportunities. 4. Establish a system of accountability practices These are: student and family supports, teacher that local education stakeholders can use in years to come.

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 3 TRENTON

Introduction

qualiﬁ cations and supports, budget, leadership, figure B and school facilities. Elements of Effective Schooling Academic progress and student well-being are the end products of all of the elements

ACCOUNTABILITY of effective schooling. We encourage readers to view student outcomes in light of how well School Facilities all of the elements of effective schooling have been implemented.

COMMUNITY CONTEXT In the full technical report (available at www.edlawcenter.org), the fi ndings from the Budget full set of more than one hundred fi fty indicators are presented with fi gures and more detailed discussion. We also refer readers of Teachers and Opportunities Student Teachers for Students this report to the technical report appendices Outcomes Supports to Learn for data sources and defi nitions, data collec- tion and analysis methodology, and a glossary of terms. Student and Family Supports

Endnotes

1. More information about 2. We thank Fred Frelow of the Leadership Abbott v. Burke is available at Rockefeller Foundation for sug- www.edlawcenter.org. gesting this approach.

4 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

The Community and Students

Research shows that living in concentrated poverty neg- atively affects the well-being and academic performance of children and youth. If our schools are to help all students meet the state’s academic standards and grow up to take meaningful roles in their communities, these effects will need to be countered. 1 TRENTON

1 The Community and Students

Here, we present indicators of community figure 1.1 distress that inform the elements of effective Conditions of Living and Learning in Trenton schooling: At 11 percent in 2000, the unemployment rate is almost twice as high in Trenton as it was New statewide. Municipal Characteristics Trenton Jersey In 2000, more than one in ﬁ ve Trenton residents Population 85,258 lived below the poverty level compared to eight Female Head of Household Families With Children 17 and Under 45% 18% percent of residents statewide. That same year, Highest Educational Attainment of Adults 25 and Over more than one quarter of Trenton’s children were from families earning below the poverty Less Than High School Diploma 38% 18% level compared to 11 percent throughout New Diploma or GED 32% 29% Jersey. Some College 21% 23% In 2002, the violent crime rate was more Bachelor’s Degree 6% 19% than four times higher in Trenton than it was throughout the state. Graduate or Professional Degree 3% 11% Labor Force Participation 57% 64% The students who attend the public schools Unemployment Rate 11% 6% reﬂ ect the families who live in Trenton. Median Household Income $31,074 $55,146 Their unique characteristics inform the Population Below Poverty Level 21% 8% educational content, the staff needed to teach Population 17 and Under Below Poverty Level 27% 11% and support teaching, the space and facilities Rent-income Ratio 28% 26% in which teaching and learning occur, and the Renter-occupied Housing 55% 34% leadership that guides the whole educational Vacant Housing 13% 7% process. Programs that meet the needs of Violent Crime Rate (Per 1,000) 17.3 3.8 Trenton’s children and youth—such as bilin- source Uniform Crime Report, 2002; 2000 US Census. gual programs and nutrition programs—also have different budget needs.

6 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

The Community and Students 1

In 2003–04, 61 percent of Trenton’s public school students were eligible for free- or figure 1.2 reduced-price lunch compared to about one in Characteristics of Students in Trenton four students statewide. Trenton students move more than New Jersey students on average—17 percent entered or left school at least once during the 2002–03 All Other school year. High student mobility disrupts Abbott I and J New Trenton Districts Districts Jersey educational progress and has negative effects on student learning. Total Enrollment 14,322 Eligible for Free-/Reduced-price Lunch 60.5% 68.9% 3.3% 26.2% Race/Ethnicity Black 66.9% 40.6% 4.4% 17.1% Latino/a 28.6% 42.9% 3.6% 17.1% White 3.8% 13.3% 80.3% 58.5% Asian 0.6% 3.0% 11.5% 7.1% Native American 0.0% 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% Limited English Proﬁ ciency (LEP) 5.5% 11.9% 1.5% 4.8% Students with Disabilities (IEP) 12.7% 12.5% 12.0% 13.1% Student Mobility Rate 17.4% 23.1% 5.2% 12.2%

source Fall Survey, 2003-04; School Report Card, 2002-03; Trenton Public Schools, 2003-04

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 7 8 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

The Preschool Program

The Abbott preschool remedy is based on research showing that intensive, high-quality preschool programs can help children perform better in school and participate more productively in the life of their communities as adults. Abbott preschool began in 1999–00; by 2005–06, all Abbott districts are required to serve 90 2 percent of the eligible population. TRENTON

2 The Preschool Program

The major features of Abbott preschool are: figure 2.1 figure 2.2 Six-hour school day, 180 days a year; Preschool Enrollment: Trenton, 1999–00 to 2004–05 Preschool Population Served: Trenton, 2000–01 to 2004–05 Provisions for full-day, full-year wrap-around child care services;3 Certifi ed teacher and an assistant for each 2,500 100% class; Maximum class size of 15 students; 2,000 80% Adequate facilities; 1,500 60% Transportation, health and other related ser- 976 2,427 100.0% vices, as needed; 921 79.1% 1,000 831 1,903 40% 790 68.6%0 65.5% 68.6% Developmentally appropriate curriculum that meets the state’s Early Childhood Education 500 20% 641 730 Program Expectations Standards of Quality and 438 502 is linked with New Jersey’s Core Curriculum 0 0 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Content Standards (CCCS); Adequate state funding for all programs; and 4-year-old Enrollment Actual Population Served All three- and four-year-old children residing in 3-year-old Enrollment Projected Population Served the school district are eligible, with enrollment 4 Total Actual Enrollment on demand. Total Projected Enrollment NOTE: The 2001–02 eligible preschool population is an average of the eligible population in 2000–01 and 2002–03 Opportunities for Students to Learn source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Early Childhood source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Early Childhood Program Enrollment. By 2005–06, all Programs, 2003; New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Programs, 2003; New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of School Funding, 1999-2003. School Funding, 1999-2003. Abbott districts are required to enroll 90 percent of their eligible populations of three- and four-year-olds. The Trenton preschool program is on its way to meeting the state’s 2005–06 enrollment requirements. The program served 79 percent of

10 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

The Preschool Program 2

the eligible population in 2003–04 and was ex- pected to serve all eligible children in 2004–05. figure 2.3 figure 2.4 In 2004–05, Trenton Public Schools contracted Preschool Enrollment by Provider Type: Educational Environment of Preschoolers with Disabilities: with one Head Start program in 10 locations Trenton, 1999–00 to 2002–03 Trenton, 2003–04 (N=61) and 28 other private providers in 35 locations. The district also runs 14 programs in its own 100% buildings. Since the Abbott preschool program began in 1999–00, the district has placed more 80% children in community-run programs than in district programs. According to a community 74% 75% 60% 80% 79% member who reviewed this report, Trenton has had a collaborative relationship with its 40% community preschool providers and works with them as viable partners. 20% 26% Programs for Children with Disabilities. 25% 20% 21% 0 The law requires that school districts provide 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 children with disabilities with educational experiences and services tailored to their in- In District Self-Contained 57% dividual needs. For as much time as possible, Other Private Providers Separate School 43% this education must be in an environment source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Early Childhood source New Jersey Department of Education, Offi ce of with general education students and not in Programs, 2003; New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Special Education, 2003-2004. self-contained settings. School Funding, 1999-2003. More than half of Trenton’s 61 preschoolers with disabilities (57%) were in self-contained classes. The remaining 43 percent were enrolled in a separate school. The data suggest that the district reported students enrolled at the Step Ahead Program as attending a separate school. According to a community member who reviewed this report, Step Ahead serves only children with disabilities, despite its efforts

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 11 TRENTON

2 The Preschool Program

to develop an inclusionary program. If so, all of Abbott preschool programs. Unfortunately, Trenton’s preschoolers with disabilities were there were too few classrooms assessed in educated in self-contained classrooms. Trenton to use this information. More data on program quality—such as the results of reliable Curriculum. The New Jersey Department program evaluation measures like the Early of Education’s Early Childhood Education Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS- Program Expectations: Standards of Quality set R)—are needed in all Abbott districts so that we can understand the strengths, weaknesses, standards for learning outcomes and outlines and challenges confronted by their preschool More data on program how teachers should conduct specifi c activi- programs. ties. Since they were released in 2002–03, the quality are needed so that Expectations have become the benchmark for Preschool Teacher Qualifi cations determining how effectively the classroom and Supports we can understand the curriculum is being implemented. Educational Attainment of Preschool Currently, Trenton’s preschool providers use a Teachers. Abbott preschool teachers are strengths, weaknesses, variety of curricula. In 2005, the district plans required to have a bachelor’s degree. This to institute a uniform, research-based approach and challenges confront- across program locations. As of the date of standard applies immediately to all teachers this writing, the new curriculum had not been working in district-run programs. Teachers in ed by Abbott preschool selected. community programs who need fewer than 30 Program Quality. One good way to credits may be eligible for an extension until programs. understand the strengths, weaknesses, and September 2006. Head Start teachers have challenges confronted by Abbott preschool four years from the date when their program programs is to have a consistent and reliable fi rst contracted with an Abbott district to method of measuring program quality that is complete this requirement. used regularly in all public preschool pro- In 2004–05, all preschool teachers working in grams, including the Abbott districts. the district or private provider programs had earned their four-year degree. State-supported university-based researchers assess preschool program quality in several

12 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

The Preschool Program 2

Preschool Teacher Certifi cation. In ad- in all of the programs had at least provisional figure 2.5 dition to earning a bachelor’s degree, Abbott early childhood certifi cation. preschool teachers must also be certifi ed.5 Special education certifi ed teachers only taught Preschool Teacher Educational Attainment by Provider Type: in self-contained special education classrooms Trenton, 2004–05 Preschool through Grade 3 (P-3) is the in 2004–05. However, there were no special standard certifi cation for all new teachers education certifi ed teachers at Step Ahead, where some preschoolers with disabilities were 100% entering Abbott preschool programs. One enrolled. route teachers can use to earn the P-3 is to fi rst 80% Preschool Teacher Salary. All other things 56% obtain a provisional “certifi cate of eligibility” 60% 83% being equal, school districts that pay teach- 90% 91% (CE) or a certifi cate of eligibility with advanced ers well are more likely to attract a broader 40% standing (CEAS). While teaching in a preschool pool of applicants for teaching positions. program, teachers then complete a series of 20% 44% Improving preschool teacher pay may also 17% mentoring and evaluation sessions. CE can- 10% 9% help to improve preschool program quality 0 didates must also take part in early childhood In District Enhanced Other Private Total by reducing teacher turnover and boosting (n=32) Head Start Provider (N=141) instructional training. Teachers with a standard (n=10) (n=99) teacher morale. The New Jersey Supreme certifi cate to teach students in nursery school Court recognized this in 2002 when it ordered through Grade 8 (N-8) and at least two years No Degree the New Jersey Department of Education to BA/BS of full-time teaching experience in an early provide funds to help Head Start and other Graduate Degree childhood setting also fulfi ll the certifi cation private provider programs raise their teacher requirement under a “grandfather clause” in source Trenton Public Schools, 2004-05 salaries to levels equal to those of teachers in the regulations. Teachers with special educa- district-run programs. tion certifi cation may only teach self-contained In Trenton, the average preschool teacher salary early childhood classrooms or serve as a second was $47,797. On average, preschool teachers teacher in an inclusion classroom. in district-run programs earned $20,000 more than teachers in any other type of provider. In Trenton, the preschool teachers were on Teachers working in the district’s programs had their way to meeting the Abbott certifi cation more years of schooling and spent more years requirement. In 2004–05, all but one teacher

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 13 TRENTON

2 The Preschool Program

in their current positions than their counter- figure 2.6 figure 2.7 parts in other provider types.

Preschool Teacher Certiﬁ cation by Provider Type: Average Preschool Teacher Salary: Trenton, 2003–04 Trenton, 2004–05 Preschool Budget

1.0% 0.7% The Abbott preschool program is funded by 100% $60,000 17.3% the state from two different sources. Early 30.0% 29.8% 80% $45,000 Childhood Program Aid (ECPA) is allocated 68.7% 28.2% 5.0% 60% to all Abbott districts and another 102 school 23.4% 40.0% $30,000 $58,086 districts serving low-income students. 40% $47,797 $37,055 $37,556 Since 2002–03, Abbott districts also receive 21.9% 53.5% $15,000 20% 41.1% Preschool Expansion Aid (PSEA) to cover the 3.1% 30.0% 6.3% costs of expanding the programs to meet full 0 0 In District Enhanced Other Private Total In District Enhanced Other Private Total enrollment. (n=32) Head Start Providers (N=141) (n=32) Head Start Provider (N=141) (n=10) (n=99) (n=10) (n=99) At $12,183 per preschooler in 2003–04, Trenton’s preschool aid was comparable to Uncertifi ed the district’s combined education budget for Nursery or Elementary Certifi cation (N-8) Kindergarten through Grade 12. Special Education Certifi cate of Eligibility (CE or CEAS) Preschool to Grade 3 (P-3) Preschool Leadership State regulations require each Abbott school source Trenton Public Schools, 2004-05 source Trenton Public Schools, 2003-04 district to establish an Early Childhood Edu- cation Advisory Council (ECEAC). The ECEAC is a group of community stakeholders who are interested in the education and welfare of preschool-age children. The purpose of the ECEAC is to meet regularly, review the school

14 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

The Preschool Program 2

district’s progress towards full implementa- As a recent report published by the United figure 2.8 tion of high-quality preschool programs, States Government Accountability Ofﬁ ce noted, New Jersey’s public preschools do not currently and participate in program planning, budget Per Student Preschool Aid: Trenton and generate consistent and reliable informa- All Other Abbott Districts, 2002–03 and 2003–04 development, and early childhood facilities tion that will help us to understand how well planning. children are doing statewide. We need to strike a balance between the concerns of early child- $14,000 In 2003–04, the district established an Early hood education specialists about widespread $12,000 Childhood Education Advisory Council (ECEAC) assessment of young children and the need to to replace its early childhood advisory board. know exactly how well the programs are serv- $10,000 The ECEAC is made up of district early child- ing Abbott preschoolers. Outcome measures $8,000 hood staff, a parent, and staff members from are needed to help stakeholders to identify $6,000 $12,183 Step Ahead (ARC-Mercer), Head Start, and oth- programs that work and those that need more $10,331 $10,668 $9,503 er private provider programs. Also on the coun- assistance. $4,000 cil are representatives from the New Jersey $2,000 Departments of Education and Human Services. 0 The ECEAC meets monthly and provides input Trenton All Other Abbott Districts in the development of long-term operational plans and budgets to make sure they reﬂ ect the needs of Trenton’s early preschool children. 2002–03 2003–04

Preschool Student Outcomes source New Jersey Department of Education, Ofﬁ ce of School Funding, We turn to outcomes to ask if the elements 2002-2004 discussed so far—student and family characteristics, opportunities for students to learn, teacher qualiﬁ cations and supports, budget, and leadership—have worked together to improve learning among the district’s three- and four-year-olds.

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 15 TRENTON

2 The Preschool Program

figure 2.9 Endnotes Abbott Preschool Program: Benchmark Status In Trenton 3. The New Jersey Department 5. As with the Abbott preschool of Education covers the cost for teacher education require- six hours, 180 days per year of ment, the certifi cation standard preschool education. The New applied immediately to teachers Benchmark Status Jersey Department of Human in district-run programs. Services funds before- and Teachers in community provider District teachers required to have Met after-school “wraparound” care programs have until September bachelor’s degree and care during the summer to 2006, and Head Start teachers Teachers in community provider programs Met provide a ten-hour, 245-day per have four years from the date have until September 2006 to earn a year program. when their program contracted bachelor’s degree with the Abbott district. 4. Age eligibility for three- and Head Start teachers have four years from Met four-year-olds is based on the date their program contracted with the the date the district uses to district to earn a bachelor’s degree determine age eligibility for Kindergarten. District teachers required to have Met certifi cation Head Start teachers have four years from Met the date their program contracted with the district to earn certifi cation

16 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education

New Jersey’s Core Curriculum Content Standards deﬁ ne what all students should know and be able to do at each grade and by the time they graduate from high school. Abbott provides several means to help students in low-income, urban districts achieve these standards. 3 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

These include: Kindergarten through Grade 3: 21 figure 3.1 Funding at the same level as the wealthiest (“I Grades 4 through 5: 23 Average Class Size by Grade: Trenton, 2002–03 and J”) suburban districts in the state; Grades 6 through 12: 24 Class size limits; In 2002–03, Trenton’s average class sizes in Comprehensive, or “whole-school” reform; most grades were smaller than the Abbott standard. Limited classroom space may have 25 Programs and services to meet the needs of hampered the district’s progress in this regard, students and their families; 20 however: class sizes in Grades 5, 10, and 12 Assessment in each content area to measure exceeded state standards. student improvement at the classroom, school, 15 In 1994–95, the average Trenton elementary and district levels; and 23.3 24.3 24.0 school class size was about 20. Class size 21.3 22.3 20.0 20.2 19.9 10 19.1 18.6 19.6 19.5 Ways to help “low-performing” schools dropped to 16.5 in 1999–00 and rose again to improve. about 18 in 2002–03. Elementary school class 5 sizes in the other Abbott districts decreased from 21 to just less than 19. Across the state 0 Opportunities for Students to Learn and in the wealthiest districts, they have stayed 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th Class Size. Research suggests that smaller at about 20 students throughout this period. Trenton class sizes can help teachers spend less time Trenton’s high school class sizes were at about Abbott Standard 12 students in 1994–95 and rose to about 24 on behavior management and more time on students in 2002–03, larger than in any other instruction that is better attuned to stu- district grouping. Trenton’s high school enroll- source School Report Card, 2002-03 ment grew 24 percent during this period. The dents’ needs. In fact, there is strong evidence opening of the Daylight Twilight School likely that smaller class sizes help students in the caused some of the enrollment growth. Enroll- early elementary grades to perform better in ment changes in Trenton’s high schools partly explain overall class size increases. school. Evidence on the beneﬁ ts of smaller class sizes for students in later grades is less Programs for Children with Disabilities. The law requires that school districts provide clear. In recognition of the potential beneﬁ ts children with disabilities with educational to students of all ages, Abbott schools have experiences and services tailored to their class size standards as follows: individual needs. For as much time as pos-

18 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3 sible, this education must be in an environ- figure 3.2 figure 3.3 ment with general education students and not in self-contained settings. Elementary School Average Class Size by District Grouping, High School Average Class Size by District Grouping, 1994–95 1994–95 to 2002–03 to 2002–03 Trenton has about 2,500 special needs students ages six to 21. Only about one in ﬁ ve students with disabilities goes to school in a “very 25 25 inclusionary” setting where they are educated with general education students for 80 percent 20 20 or more of the school day. In Trenton, as in the other Abbott districts, about one in three stu- 15 15 dents with disabilities is in a general education setting for less than 40 percent of the school 10 10 day compared to one in six statewide and about one in 13 in the wealthiest suburbs. 5 5

College Preparatory Classes. Nationwide, 0 0 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 high school students of color are under-rep- Trenton Trenton resented in college admissions. One reason All Other Abbott Districts All Other Abbott Districts might be a lack of opportunity to learn chal- I and J Districts I and J Districts lenging material that would make them more New Jersey New Jersey competitive applicants. source School Report Card, 1994-95 to 2002-03 source School Report Card, 1994-95 to 2002-03 Trenton Central High School offers many honors and advanced placement courses to help students become more competitive applicants and prepare them for college. We compared Trenton’s honors and AP course offerings to those in Princeton, a nearby “I” district. Trenton offers 19 honors and advanced placement courses compared to Princeton’s 26.

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 19 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

Student and Family Supports figure 3.4 Under Abbott, the state funds and the dis- Educational Environment of Students with Disabilities Ages 6–21 by District Grouping, 2003–04 tricts implement “supplemental programs.” The purpose of these programs is to address 100% disadvantages experienced by young people 7.2% 12.5% 9.3% who grow up in poor cities. There are two 90% 8.0% 28.4% kinds of “supplemental” programs under 17.2% 80% Abbott. Some programs are required; funding 70% 32.0% 28.1% to support other programs is available if a

60% 30.4% school or district can show that the students 32.3% 50% need them. Below, we present information on some of the supplemental programs and 40% 26.6% services available in Trenton’s public schools: 30% 18.7% 56.1% intensive early literacy; parent involvement; 20% 42.3% access to technology; and alternative educa- 27.9% 10% 19.9% tion and dropout prevention. More supple- 0 mental programs are described in the larger Trenton All Other I & J Districts New Jersey technical report. Abbott Districts Early Literacy. Under Abbott, schools

Separate School 40–79% Inclusion are required to provide 90-minute blocks of <40% Inclusion >80% Inclusion reading instruction to children in Kinder-

*Home and residential placements, less than one percent. garten through Grade 3. Students in Grades 1 through 3 who are not reading at grade source New Jersey Department of Education: Ofﬁ ce of Special Education Programs, 2003-04 level must receive one-on-one tutoring; older elementary grade students not read-

20 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3 ing at grade level must receive small-group also build a sense of community accountabil- tutoring. ity for student learning. Under the No Child We reviewed early literacy programs in four Left Behind Act of 2001, districts are required schools that serve students in the elementary to use a portion of their federal funding to grades. They all offered tutoring for some, but not all of the students who needed it. Gregory form and support a district parent advisory School students in Grades 1 and 2 received council. Abbott schools are required to make one-on-one tutoring from program staff from efforts to involve parents and caregivers in the Newgrange Educational Outreach Program of Princeton; and CFL/ALEM, the school’s Whole their children’s education and in general School Reform Model, provides small-group school decision-making. At the very least, tutoring to students in Grades 4 and 5. Parker and Washington Schools offered tutoring to each school should have a parent-community students in Grades 1 through 3. Rivera School coordinator (or family liaison) and parent only provided literacy tutoring to special edu- representation on its SLC. cation students in Grades 4 and 5 in inclusion programs. All of the schools cited staffi ng or One of the most visible districtwide parent budget limits as the reason they did not have involvement efforts in Trenton is the DADS the complete tutoring programs required by program that has been in operation since Abbott. 2002–03. Trenton DADS are volunteers who tutor and mentor students and provide safe Parent Involvement. Emerging research passage to and from school in neighborhoods suggests that children with parents who are where there have been violent incidents. DADS also visit schools daily and recruit other parents engaged in their learning are more likely to to participate in school activities. earn higher grades and test scores, improve Trenton has not had a formal districtwide par- their social skills, graduate from high school, ent committee in recent years, but intends to and go on to college. Parent involvement in re-establish one in 2005–06. The district will encourage the new parent committee to affi li- the school can be important too if it is linked ate with the National Network of Partnership to improving learning, developing specifi c Schools who can provide resources to support and enhance meaningful parent involvement. skills, or encouraging children to take more Even without a formal districtwide parent challenging classes. Parent involvement can committee, the district has sent 30–40 parents

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 21 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

to attend the convention of district parent and libraries have adequate equipment, and figure 3.5 advisory councils every year. technology is effectively used to support According to the district, most schools have Student–Computer Ratio by District Grouping, teaching and learning. parent-teacher organizations and No Child Left 1997–98 to 2002–03 Behind (NCLB) funds are allocated to support After 1997–98, Trenton students had easier them every year. Schools use NCLB funds to access to computers than their peers in other 15 provide refreshments, childcare, and informa- district groupings. There were 12.4 Trenton tional resources for parent meetings. students to every computer in 1997–98 and Community members who reviewed this report 4.1 students to each computer in 2002–03. 10 observed two obstacles to parent involvement Computer access improved dramatically in the in Trenton: a lack of parent training and insuf- other Abbott districts too. The average number fi cient cultural sensitivity from the schools. Ac- of students to every computer decreased from 10.4 to 4.8 in the other Abbott districts, better 5 cording to them, the training shortage is partly the result of a layoff at the end of the 2003–04 than the Abbott standard. Access to computers school year. They also said that parent-com- also improved throughout the state and in the munity coordinators are sometimes asked to wealthiest districts. 0 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 do multiple tasks outside of their job responsi- Alternative Education and Dropout bilities. The reviewers also observed that some Trenton school staff and offi cials do not communicate Prevention. Abbott districts are also required All Other Abbott Districts effectively with families with cultural back- to identify and provide services to students at I and J Districts grounds that are different from their own. New Jersey Research shows that schools that effectively risk of failing and dropping out. At a mini- involve parents show respect for cultural differ- mum, the districts are required to provide ences and engage diverse families. source School Report Card, 1997-98 to 2002-03 alternative programs for young people in Access to Technology. Under Abbott, middle and high school, and be adequately there should be no more than fi ve students to staffed with dropout prevention specialists. each computer in each school throughout the Daylight/Twilight High School serves Trenton district. Abbott districts are required to have students ages 16 and older that have dropped staff to make sure that students master the out of school or who are over age for their grade. About one-third of the students are technology needed to reach the state’s Core adults who did not fi nish high school. The Curriculum Content Standards, classrooms school has four sites: the original Bellevue Avenue location and three other satellites

22 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3

throughout the city. The program, originally their students. One provision requires that modeled after University City High School in certain teachers must be “highly qualifi ed” in Philadelphia, offers courses in all of the core 6 content areas; and elective credits in commu- each subject they teach. The requirements nity service, work-study, and life experience. of becoming highly qualifi ed vary depending There are three school shifts throughout the day to accommodate students who work and/ on when the teacher is hired and what type or take care of children. Each school session is of school he or she teaches in. In general, a 10 weeks long making it possible for students teacher must hold a four-year college degree, to begin at almost at any time during the year. be fully certifi ed, and show a level of knowl- A key feature of the Daylight/Twilight program The Daylight/Twilight is its support system for students. Students edge in his or her subject matter by passing a experiencing problems of any kind meet with state test. New middle and high school teach- Program offers courses an administrator as soon as possible. By the end of the school day, each student meets with his ers must also have a certain amount of college or her lead teachers and appropriate subject credits in the subject matter they teach. The in all of the core content area teachers in a discussion intended to elimi- law applies equally to teachers who teach many nate issues and concerns. If needed, parents or areas, and elective cred- caregivers are invited for a third session with core subjects (such as many elementary school administrators, teachers, and the student. The and special education teachers), those who its in community service, district believes that this support process is at the heart of Daylight/Twilight’s success in re- specialize in a single subject (such as many taining students in school and improving their middle and high school teachers), basic skills work-study, and life academic and social/emotional progress. teachers; and bilingual and ESL teachers. Trenton does not currently run an alternative experience. education program for middle school students. All districts must submit a “highly qualifi ed teacher” report. Many districts, including Trenton, had diffi culty compiling the K-12 Teacher Qualifi cations and Supports information needed to fulfi ll this reporting Highly Qualifi ed Teachers. The Federal No requirement. In Trenton, the district at- Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) outlines several tempted to collect the needed information measures that schools and districts must take from the schools. Schools were to survey to ensure a quality public education to all of teachers and transmit updated information to

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 23 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

the district offi ce. Because of uneven compli- figure 3.6 figure 3.7 ance with this request, district staff needed to Highly Qualifi ed Teachers by District Grouping: Highly Qualifi ed Teachers by District Grouping: fi nd another way to comply with the federal Elementary Schools, 2003–04 High Schools, 2003–04 reporting requirement. In the end, district staff compiled the needed information from 100% 100% 90% 90% human resources fi les which may have lacked 80% 80% complete, up-to-date information. The 70% 70% 60% 60% Trenton report review team believed that this

50% 98.0 96.7 98.6 50% 98.2 96.3 97.0 94.0 97.2 94.6 92.6 96.2 93.6 94.9 occurred as a result of intradistrict commu- 91.3 87.0 89.9 86.1 87.8 40% 80.0 40% 76.0 nication problems. After conﬁ rming that the 30% 30% 53.0 47.2 47.2 20% 39.0 20% following information was what the district 10% 10% had submitted, the reviewers concluded that 0 0 Percent Highly Percent Highly Percent Core Academic Percent Highly Percent Highly Percent Core it should be viewed—despite its potential Qualified in at Least Qualified in Classes in School Qualified in Academic Classes in Qualified in at Least problems—because of its importance as a ONE Subject ALL Subjects Taught by Highly ONE Subject ALL Subjects School Taught by Qualified Teachers Highly Qualified Teachers proxy for teaching quality.

Trenton Trenton The vast majority of teachers in the state are All Other Abbott Districts All Other Abbott Districts highly qualifi ed, but Trenton had the lowest percentage of highly qualifi ed teachers among I and J Districts I and J Districts the district groupings we examined. Three out New Jersey New Jersey of four (76%) Trenton elementary school teachers were highly qualifi ed in at least one subject source Highly Qualifi ed Teacher Survey, 2004 source Highly Qualifi ed Teacher Survey, 2004 and slightly more than half (53%) were highly qualifi ed in all of the core subjects they taught. There was a real gap between Trenton and the other district groupings in the percent of classes taught by highly qualifi ed teachers. Thirty-nine percent of Trenton’s core elementary school classes were taught by highly qualifi ed teachers, compared to about 90 percent in the other

24 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3

Abbott districts and even more in the other district groupings. There are two reasons we might figure 3.8 see a difference between the percent of highly qualifi ed teachers on the one hand and the Percent of Schools with Required Abbott Staff Positions: Trenton and All Other Abbott Districts, percent of classes taught by them on the other. 2002-03 to 2003-04 The percent of classes may be lower if highly qualifi ed teachers have lighter courseloads. Trenton All Other Abbott Districts Also, teachers may be asked to teach subjects other than the ones they are highly qualifi ed Elementary Schools Staff 2002-03 2003-04 2002-03 2003-04 for. In Trenton, either the highly qualifi ed teach- Instructional Facilitator 100.0% 100.0% 97.1% 94.9% ers teach fewer classes or are being assigned to Social Worker 55.6% 33.3% 70.5% 70.8% teach other subjects. Teacher Tutor 100.0% 100.0% 20.2% 36.9% All Positions 55.6% 33.3% 18.3% 33.7% Fewer than half of Trenton’s high school teachers were highly qualifi ed in at least one subject; however, 80 percent of the core academic Trenton All Other Abbott Districts classes were taught by highly qualifi ed teach- Middle and High Schools Staff 2002-03 2003-04 2002-03 2003-04 ers. These fi ndings suggest that the highly qualifi ed teachers taught the majority of core Attendance/Dropout Prevention Offi cer 40.0% 40.0% 49.8% 52.4% subject area classes in the high schools. The Health-Social Service Coordinator 40.0% 20.0% 34.3% 38.0% other Abbott districts faired relatively well in All Positions 30.0% 0.0% 25.0% 26.3% comparison with the I and J districts and the state average on the three measures of highly qualifi ed teachers. Trenton All Other Abbott Districts All Schools Staff 2002-03 2003-04 2002-03 2003-04 Staffi ng Patterns. Several staffi ng posi- Family Liaison (Parent-Community Coordinator) 54.2% 83.3% 69.3% 70.3% tions are needed to put the Abbott reforms Guidance Counselor 95.8% 100.0% 93.7% 93.2% into action. Some positions are required in all Librarian/Media Specialist 95.8% 95.8% 89.1% 90.8% Nurse/Health Specialist 95.8% 95.8% 97.3% 97.1% schools, others are specifi c to elementary or Security Offi cer 95.8% 100.0% 87.7% 88.4% secondary schools. Technology Coordinator 87.5% 91.7% 82.1% 86.0% All Positions 45.8% 75.0% 58.0% 55.8% All of Trenton’s elementary schools had teacher tutors on staff to assist children who have dif- source DOENET Abbott School-Based Budget Staffi ng Tables, 2002-03 to 2003-04 fi culty reading. The schools we visited provided tutoring to students reading behind grade level

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 25 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

in some, but not all of the elementary grades, districts, the local tax levy is supplemented by figure 3.9 however. state aid. Several sources of state aid—avail- Average Property Value Per Student by District Grouping, Between 2002–03 and 2003–04, there was able to all New Jersey school districts on 1998–2003 some change in the extent to which Trenton a formula basis—come out of the school schools staffed positions that are required un- funding law called the Comprehensive Edu- $1,000,000 der Abbott. More schools had at least one family liaison, guidance counselor, security ofﬁ cer, cational Improvement and Financing Act of and technology coordinator. Fewer elementary $750,000 schools had at least one social worker. Fewer 1996 (CEIFA). “Core Curriculum Standards middle and high schools had a health and social Aid” (CCSA) makes up the difference be- $500,000 service coordinator. tween what school districts can afford and what the state estimates to be an adequate $250,000 K-12 Budget level of school funding to support a thorough Public education is, of course, an essential and efﬁ cient education. Some districts also 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 service provided by local governments and receive “Supplemental CCSA” to ease their

Trenton education costs are higher in school districts local tax burdens. “Stabilization Aid” goes to All Other Abbott Districts with high concentrations of low-income districts that might otherwise lose too much Wealthiest Suburbs households. Because local taxes are based on CCSA from year to year because of enrollment New Jersey property values, property wealth is a good in- changes. dicator of the availability of money to support A key feature of Abbott is the requirement source New Jersey Department of Community Affairs: Ofﬁ ce of Local Government Services, 1998-2003 education. that general education funding in the poor- The wealthiest suburbs had ﬁ ve times more est urban school districts be at a level equal to property wealth per student than in Trenton in what is spent on average in our state’s most 2003. That same year, the state average was four times higher than Trenton. successful suburban districts. In recognition of the low property wealth and high tax General Education Funding.7 The basic rates in these districts, the state is required source of general education funding in New Jersey is the local tax levy. In many school

26 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3 to provide the funding needed to achieve this has been provided by the state since CEIFA. figure 3.10 equality. Abbott districts have received this It is targeted to school districts serving poor funding—called “Abbott Parity Aid”—from the children and calculated on a per student Per Student General Education Funding by District Grouping, 2002–03 and 2003–04 state every year since 1997–98.8 basis. Both Abbott and non-Abbott districts

On a per student basis, Trenton and the other may receive Title I and DEPA funds. $12,500 Abbott districts have as much money as the Only Abbott districts receive “Additional successful suburban districts to support general $10,000 education. In fact, there has been equity in Abbott Aid,” the third source of supplemen- funding for general education between the tal programs funding. Each Abbott district $7,500 poorest cities and the wealthiest suburbs in must apply to the state for Additional Abbott $10,383 $10,535 New Jersey since 1997 when Abbott parity $9,756 $10,265 $9,835 $9,973 $5,000 $9,218 $9,729 began. Aid and justify its request with evidence of student need. The New Jersey Department of $2,500 Supplemental Programs Funding. To be Education reviews district requests and issues ready and successful learners, the children 0 its decisions. The state may fully fund, deny Trenton All Other I & J New Jersey and youth of Trenton have unique needs for Abbott Districts Districts health, nutrition, and social services that portions, or fund programs at lower levels than requested by the districts. School dis- 2002–03 must be addressed. There are three sources of 2003–04 money to support supplemental programs in tricts may appeal the state’s decision in court. Abbott districts: one comes from the federal Not surprisingly, this process has been a source New Jersey Department of Education, Ofﬁ ce of School Funding, 2002-2004 government and two from the state. The fed- source of conﬂ ict between the Abbott districts eral funding is called “Title I” and provides and the New Jersey Department of Education funding for schools serving children from since it began in 1999. low-income families. The money is intended In 2003–04, Trenton received an additional $2,424 per student in supplemental pro- to improve educational quality and give extra gram aid to support the second half-day of help to struggling students. The second Kindergarten and other programs and services supplemental programs funding source, “De- to meet the needs of its students and their families. monstrably Effective Program Aid” (DEPA),

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 27 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

K-12 Leadership candidates and recommend candidates to the figure 3.11 School Leadership Councils. State regula- district’s Superintendent. Per Student Supplemental Program Aid: Trenton and All Other tions require every school in the Abbott Along with the other Abbott districts, Abbott Districts, 2002–03 and 2003–04 districts to have a School Leadership Council Trenton used school-based budgeting in the

$3,000 (SLC). The SLC is a group that serves on a early years of Abbott. These budgets were “zero-based,” that is, they speciﬁ ed each $2,500 volunteer basis to represent school staff and neighborhood residents. Their primary pur- and every needed program and staff member $2,000 pose is to help improve teaching and learn- from the ground up. In general, SLCs took the $1,500 ing. They do this by taking part in program lead in school-based planning and budgeting $2,571 $2,424 $1,000 $1,989 $1,949 planning and decision-making and encour- efforts, getting input from a variety of school

$500 aging broad participation by school staff and staff and community members on needed programs and stafﬁ ng. 0 neighborhood stakeholders. SLC members Trenton All Other Abbott Districts serve at least two years with staggered terms. In all of the Abbott districts, control over SLCs should meet at least once a month. budgeting and planning moved away from 2002–03 the schools and their SLCs and returned to 2003–04 SLCs should take part in a wide variety of activities to carry out their functions, includ- the district ofﬁ ce in 2002–03. Since then, the

source New Jersey Department of Education, Offi ce of School Funding, ing: reviewing needs assessment and achieve- process has begun with the district’s business 2002-2004 ment data; reviewing school-based budgets administrator, who sets school budgets based prepared by the central offi ce and making on a state template, previous spending levels, recommendations to amend them; and par- and a cost-of-living increase. The district’s ticipating in training provided by the district business administrator sends a copy of each or New Jersey Department of Education. school’s budget to its SLC for review and SLCs that are trained to perform personnel modifi cation. SLCs may then be asked to sup- functions may also interview school principal port and sign their school’s budget before it is

28 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3 packaged with the district’s budget and sent to holders. The primary responsibilities of the the New Jersey Department of Education. Council are to review district policies and Representation of stakeholder groups on procedures to implement the Abbott reforms. SLCs varies from school to school in Trenton. As of September 2004, Trenton did not have a Typically, they are made up of the required districtwide Abbott Advisory Council. members, although one chair admitted that there has never been parent representation on her committee. K-12 Student Outcomes SLCs in the six schools we visited participated in the budgeting and three-year planning As education stakeholders, we need to ensure Each Abbott district process. Five had the opportunity to vote in that educational success is not determined support of their schools’ plans and budgets as by where a student lives. We need to ensure should have an Abbott required under Abbott. that the schools provide opportunities for One SLC representative talked about how dif- Advisory Council to re- fi cult it has been to fi nd out who is responsible students to learn; staff to teach students, and at the district and state level for providing SLCs supports for that staff; fi nancial resources with professional development. SLC members view district policies and told us that they needed guidance with budget- to work with; a sound educational environ- ing, curriculum, and team building. One chair ment; and leadership to guide the whole procedures and imple- expressed frustration with the confl icting mes- process. The Abbott remedies were intended sages SLCs often receive from district offi cials about the budgeting process: program staff to support efforts of schools, districts, parents ment the Abbott reforms. encourage them to propose needed programs and advocates to improve these elements of in their plans and budgets, but fi nance staff tell them that the funding is not available. As a schooling. We cannot understand how schools result, most requests for added funding for new or districts are doing—or help them to do bet- staff positions are denied. ter—unless we consider all of these elements. Abbott Advisory Council. Each Abbott We encourage readers to review and consider district should have an “Abbott Advisory the student outcomes presented below in light Council,” a steering committee that repre- of the material presented up to this point. sents the district and its community stake-

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 29 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

Student Attendance. Students who feel ing on an average day; it was at its highest in figure 3.12 safe at school and are engaged in their aca- the following year, with 87 percent attendance. High school attendance was higher in the other Student Attendance by District Grouping: Elementary Schools, demic work tend to go to school more often. Abbott districts and improved from 86 to 89 1994–95 to 2002–03 Of course, students also miss school because percent over the years. The high school attendance rate remained at about 92 percent across of other reasons such as poor health and fam- the state. High school attendance was highest 100% ily problems. In general, we think that stu- in the wealthiest suburbs at about 95 percent in all years except 1999–00. 90% dent attendance is an important indicator that school is a positive experience for children Child and Youth Well-Being. Children 80% and youth and that the students’ families, the and youth who are physically, socially, and 70% district, and the larger community are ad- emotionally healthy are better able to learn dressing any obstacles to attendance that may at school. Many of Abbott’s supplemental 60% exist. It is presented here as a leading indica- programs have as their purpose to improve 50% 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 tor: students can only beneﬁ t from opportu- the well-being of children and youth of New

Trenton nities to learn if they attend school regularly. Jersey’s cities. School staff either provide di- All Other Abbott Districts Trenton’s elementary school student at- rect services to children and their families or I and J Districts tendance was at 93 percent in 1994–95 and help them to link with needed services already New Jersey remained at about that level in all years except 2000–01, when it was at about 95 percent. El- provided in the community. Service provision ementary school attendance across New Jersey and linkage are essential parts of the jobs of source School Report Card, 1994-95 to 2002-03 was high, at about 95 percent in 1994–95 and health and social services coordinators, par- stayed just as high right through 2002–03. In most years, about 95 percent of elementary ent-community coordinators, family liaisons, students in the I and J districts attended school social workers, and guidance counselors, to on any given day. name a few. As a central public institution of Attendance rates in the high schools were lower than in the elementary schools across the urban community, schools play a critical the state. Trenton High School attendance role in ensuring the well-being of children varied from year to year: it was at its lowest in and youth. Schools are not alone in their 2000–01 with 81 percent of students attend-

30 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3 responsibility—parents, elected offi cials, school in the district or a charter school in and public and private agencies in the city the same city. figure 3.13 must all play a role. As the African proverb so The New Jersey Department of Education Student Attendance by District Grouping: famously says: “It takes a whole village to raise considers how many violent and disruptive High Schools, 1994–95 to 2002–03 a child.” incidents occur over a three-year period 100% The City of Trenton compares poorly with the to identify persistently dangerous schools. state on three indicators of child and youth There are two types of incidents counted. 90% well-being. There has been some improvement They are: in teen births among young women ages 10 to 80% 14 and ages 15 to 19. The child abuse and ne- 1) Category A Offenses: fi rearm offenses; aggravat- glect rate also decreased. However, these rates ed assaults on another student; assaults with a 70% are still unacceptably high and much higher weapon on another student; and assaults on a than the state average. school district staff member. 60% School Safety. For many years, federal law 2) Category B Offenses: simple assault; weapons 50% possession or sales (other than a fi rearm); gang 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 has required every school and district to re- fi ght; robbery or extortion; sex offense; terror- port the violence and vandalism that occur in istic threat; arson; sales or distribution of drugs; Trenton schools. The New Jersey Department of Edu- and harassment and bullying. All Other Abbott Districts I and J Districts cation compiles annual counts and reports The persistently dangerous classifi cation New Jersey them publicly. The No Child Left Behind Act has been roundly criticized by many camps

(NCLB) specifi ed a standard of safety beyond and on many grounds. The most important source School Report Card, 1994-95 to 2002-03 which schools are defi ned as “persistently criticisms, for the purposes of this report, dangerous.” Under the “Unsafe School Choice are related to reporting accuracy. Our main Option,” the law provides that families of concern is the likelihood of under-report- children who are victims of violence or who ing by schools and districts. Principals and go to a persistently dangerous school may superintendents who abide to the letter of the choose to send their child to another public law feel that they are unfairly penalized while schools and districts that “fl uff” their reports

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 31 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

figure 3.14 figure 3.15

Child and Youth Well-Being Indicators: Trenton and New Jersey, 1998–2002 “Category A” Offenses by District Grouping: Elementary Schools, 1999–00 to 2002–03

8 Trenton New Jersey PERSISTENTLY DANGEROUS THRESHOLD Time 1 Time 2 Time 1 Time 2 7 6 Indicator Time Period NUMBER PER 1,000 NUMBER PER 1,000 PER 1,000 PER 1,000 5 Births to Teens (10–14) 1998-2002 12 3.7 8 2.5 0.6 0.5 4 Births to Teens (15–19) 1998-2002 329 119.4 252 91.5 34.1 28.8 3 Child Abuse and Neglect 1998-2002 275 10.4 233 8.8 3.4 4.2 2

source New Jersey Center for Health Statistics, 1998-2002; 2000 US Census; Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2004 Kids Count; Association for 1 Children of New Jersey, 1997-2002 Kids Count. 0 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03

Trenton All Other Abbott Districts I and J Districts New Jersey

source New Jersey Department of Education: Ofﬁ ce of Program Support Services, Division of Student Services, 1999-2003

32 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3 are not. We suspect that such “fl uffi ng” is is the High School Profi ciency Assessment figure 3.16 fairly widespread in New Jersey, consider- (HSPA). Before 2001–02 high school students ing the critical importance of school safety to took a different test called the HSPT (High “Category A” Offenses by District Grouping: High Schools, 1999–00 to 2002–03 parents and children and the attention given School Profi ciency Test). to the annual publication of such incidents. There are many ways to examine achieve- 35 Under newly adopted regulations, school dis- ment test results; each way tells a part of 30 tricts have the power to penalize any employee the story. Profi ciency percentages tell us how 25 who knowingly falsifi es incident reports.9 The many students met standards for their grade 20 new regulations do not outline what powers level, but do not tell us about small or large 15 PERSISTENTLY DANGEROUS the New Jersey Department of Education has changes that did not cross the state’s offi cial THRESHOLD 10 to penalize school districts who knowingly profi ciency cutpoints. Average test scores show 5 falsify reports. changes that may not register in a profi ciency 0 None of Trenton’s schools qualifi ed as persis- analysis, but do not tell us how many students 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 tently dangerous under federal law. Although met the state’s standards. Trenton Trenton Central High School was not considered Below, we present profi ciency percentages All Other Abbott Districts persistently dangerous, it reported well over the I and J Districts number of violent or disruptive incidents—in and average scale scores for the language arts New Jersey Categories A and B—to place it in the persis- literacy and math tests at Grades 4, 8, and tently dangerous range in three nonconsecutive years out of the four we reviewed. 11, respectively. We report test results for all source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Program Support available years for each test through 2002–03. Services, Division of Student Services, 1999-2003 Student Achievement. In New Jersey, the fourth grade test is called the ASK4 (Assess- (Statewide 2003–04 test results became ment of Skills and Knowledge). It is essential- available too late to be incorporated in this ly the same test as the former ESPA (Elemen- report.) First, we compare average scores over tary School Profi ciency Assessment). The 8th time for general education students in Tren- grade test is called the GEPA (Grade Eight ton, all other Abbotts, the wealthiest (I and Profi ciency Assessment). The 11th grade test J) districts in the state, and the state overall.

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 33 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

figure 3.17 figure 3.18 figure 3.19

NCLB (Category B) Index by District Grouping: Elementary NCLB (Category B) Index by District Grouping: High Schools, Grade 4 Language Arts Literacy Average Score by District Schools, 1999–00 to 2002–03 1999–00 to 2002–03 Grouping, 1999–00 to 2002–03

1.50 3.0 300

1.25 2.5 ADVANCED PROFICIENT PERSISTENTLY DANGEROUS THRESHOLD 250 1.00 2.0

0.75 1.5 PERSISTENTLY DANGEROUS 200 THRESHOLD PROFICIENT 0.50 1.0 150 0.25 0.5

0 0 100 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03

Trenton Trenton Trenton All Other Abbott Districts All Other Abbott Districts All Other Abbott Districts I and J Districts I and J Districts I and J Districts New Jersey New Jersey New Jersey

source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Program Support source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Program Support source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Assessment and Services, Division of Student Services, 1999-2003 Services, Division of Student Services, 1999-2003 Evaluation, 1999-00 to 2002-03; School Report Card, 1999-00 to 2002-03

34 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3

Second, we show the percent of Trenton’s figure 3.20 figure 3.21 general education students scoring within the three profi ciency categories over time. Grade 4 Language Arts Literacy Profi ciency: Grade 4 Math Average Score by District Grouping 1999–00 to Trenton, 1998–99 to 2002–03 2002–03 Finally, in recognition that district averages may mask important differences between 100% 300 schools, we highlight schools that did well 36.0% ADVANCED PROFICIENT 80% 41.8% on each test in 2002–03 and schools that 46.7% 250 10 improved the most over time. 60% 77.2% 76.2% The district’s fourth graders have made gains 200 40% PROFICIENT in language arts. Trenton’s general education 63.3% 57.9% scores rose most dramatically in 2000–01, as 52.2% 150 did the scores throughout the state, but stayed 20% 22.7% 23.4% at about the same level through 2002–03. 0.1% 0.4% 1.0% 0.7% 0.3% 0 100 Grade 4 math scores improved over time. 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Trenton’s math scores improved by seven per- Trenton cent from 182 in 1999–00 to 194 in 2002–03. Partially Profi cient The fourth graders in the other Abbott districts All Other Abbott Districts scored slightly higher over time and improved Profi cient I and J Districts by fi ve percent. Grade 4 math scores through- Advanced Profi cient New Jersey out the state and in the wealthiest districts were higher, but improved less. source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Assessment and source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Assessment and More and more Trenton fourth graders scored Evaluation, 1999-00 to 2002-03; School Report Card, 1999-00 Evaluation, 1999-00 to 2002-03; School Report Card, 1999-00 to 2002-03 to 2002-03 profi cient and advanced profi cient on the math test with each passing year. Twenty-three percent scored at least profi cient in 1998–99, compared to 42 percent in 2002–03. There was a great deal of variation among the schools on the 2002–03 Grade 4 language arts literacy test. Washington Elementary was the highest performer with nearly every general education student scoring profi cient or bet-

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 35 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

ter. Mott, Harrison, and Franklin Elementary figure 3.22 figure 3.23 Schools were also high performers that year. Grade 4 Math Proﬁ ciency: Trenton, 1998–99 to 2002–03 Grade 8 Language Arts Literacy Average Score by District On the other hand, in two schools, fewer than Grouping, 1999–00 to 2002–03 40 percent of the general education students scored at least proﬁ cient on the Grade 4 language arts literacy test: P.J. Hill and Monument 100% 300 Elementary Schools.

ADVANCED PROFICIENT Improvement over time is, of course, an impor- 80% 250 58.2% tant indicator that a school is moving in the 64.7% 62.1% 70.9% right direction: Stokes, Grant, and Jefferson El- 60% 76.7% 200 ementary Schools showed the biggest gains on the Grade 4 language arts literacy test between 40% PROFICIENT 1999–00 and 2002–03. 34.6% 150 20% 30.8% 31.1% Trenton schools also varied widely on the Grade 26.7% 21.4% 6.8% 7.1% 4 math test. Four schools were high-perform- 2.0% 2.4% 4.5% 100 ers in math: Washington, Grant, Jefferson, and 0 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Parker Elementary Schools. Trenton On the other hand, in three schools, fewer than Partially Profi cient All Other Abbott Districts 33 percent of the general education students Profi cient I and J Districts scored at least profi cient on the Grade 4 math Advanced Profi cient New Jersey test: P.J. Hill, Gregory, Monument, and Luis Muñoz Rivera Elementary Schools. The four schools with most improved Grade 4 source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Assessment and source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Assessment and Evaluation, 1999-00 to 2002-03; School Report Card, 1999-00 Evaluation, 1999-00 to 2002-03; School Report Card, 1999-00 math scores were: Grant, Jefferson, Parker, and to 2002-03 to 2000-01 Stokes. When compared to the array of instructional programs and reforms for elementary school students, Abbott has yet to provide for students in the middle and high school grades. Overall, Grade 8 average scores and profi ciency percentages have remained stable although lower than the state on average.

36 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3

figure 3.24 figure 3.25 figure 3.26

Grade 8 Language Arts Literacy Proﬁ ciency: Trenton, Grade 8 Math Average Score by District Grouping, Grade 8 Math Proﬁ ciency: Trenton, 1998–99 to 2002–03 1998–99 to 2002–03 1999–00 to 2002–03

100% 300 100%

80% ADVANCED PROFICIENT 80% 250 64.2% 69.0% 69.2% 70.9% 69.6% 79.0% 77.2% 60% 60% 84.0% 86.2% 84.1% 200 40% 40% PROFICIENT 150 20% 20% 19.6% 21.8% 35.6% 31.0% 30.8% 30.2% 29.0% 14.8% 12.1% 14.7% 1.5% 1.2% 1.1% 1.7% 1.2% 0 100 0 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03

Trenton Partially Profi cient All Other Abbott Districts Partially Profi cient Profi cient I and J Districts Profi cient *Advanced Profi cient, less than one percent in all years. New Jersey Advanced Profi cient

source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Assessment and source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Assessment and source New Jersey Department of Education: Offi ce of Assessment and Evaluation, 1999-00 to 2002-03; School Report Card, 1999-00 Evaluation, 1999-00 to 2002-03, School Report Card 1999-00 Evaluation, 1999-00 to 2002-03; School Report Card, 1999-00 to 2000-01. to 2000-01 to 2000-01

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 37 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

Performance on the Grade 8 tests varied widely figure 3.27 figure 3.28 among Trenton’s schools. Columbus Elementary School stood out as a high performer in the Grade 11 (HSPA) Language Arts Literacy Average Score by Grade 11 (HSPA) Language Arts Literacy Profi ciency: district in 2002–03. District Grouping 2001–02 to 2002–03 Trenton, 2001–02 to 2002–03 In fi ve schools, fewer than one in three general education students scored profi cient or better 300 100% on the Grade 8 language arts literacy test in ADVANCED PROFICIENT 250 2002–03: Hedgepeth Williams, Grace A. Dunn, 80% PROFICIENT 48.2% 52.9% Martin Luther King Jr., and Arthur Holland 200 Middle Schools; and Luis Muñoz Marin Elemen- 60% tary School. 150 Fewer than one in three general education stu- 241 241 229 229 40% 212 212 100 193 190 dents at six schools scored at least profi cient 51.3% 45.4% on the Grade 8 math test that year: Hedgepeth 20% 50 Williams, Grace A. Dunn, Martin Luther King Jr., 1.7% and Arthur Holland Middle Schools; and Luis 0 0 Trenton All Other I & J Districts New Jersey 2001-02 2002-03 Muñoz Marin and Joyce Kilmer Elementary Abbott Districts Partially Profi cient Schools. 2001–02 Profi cient Columbus Elementary School and Grace A. Dunn Middle showed gains in Grade 8 language 2002–03 Advanced Profi cient arts literacy between 1999–00 and 2002–03. The average score of students also improved at source New Jersey Department of Education Offi ce of Assessment source New Jersey Department of Education Offi ce of Assessment Columbus Elementary School and Martin Lu- and Evaluation, 2001-02 to 2002-03; School Report Card, and Evaluation, 2001-02 to 2002-03; School Report Card, ther King Jr. and Arthur Holland Middle Schools. 2001-02 to 2002-03 2001-02 to 2002-03 On average, Trenton’s Grade 11 language arts literacy scores were just under the profi ciency level in 2001–02 and 2002–03 with about half of Trenton 11th graders meeting the state profi ciency standard. Districtwide, Grade 11 math scores also remained below the profi - ciency level, with about 21 percent meeting

38 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3

state standards. Like the nationwide stagnation in Grade 11 test scores, this lack of progress is figure 3.29 figure 3.30 likely the result of the relative lack of attention given to reforming high schools in New Grade 11 (HSPA) Math Average Score by District Grouping, Grade 11 (HSPA) Math Profi ciency: Jersey. Until recently, the Abbott remedies have 2001–02 to 2002–03 Trenton, 2001–02 to 2002–03 provided less in the way of real instructional reforms at the middle or high school levels 300 100% when compared to what has been available for ADVANCED PROFICIENT 250 younger children. 80% PROFICIENT Neither of Trenton’s high schools met the 200 criteria to be called high performers in 2002–03 60% 77.9% 78.2% in language arts literacy or math. Grade 11 150 240 240 students at Daylight/Twilight showed gains on 223 222 40% 100 200 196 both tests, however. 182 180 50 20% High School Completion. High school 21.5% 20.9% 0 0 completion is an important event that greatly Trenton All Other Abbott I & J Districts New Jersey 2001-02 2002-03 affects young people’s chances for social and Districts Partially Profi cient economic improvement. Because of this, 2001–02 Profi cient 2002–03 and because it is the culmination of a school *Advanced Profi cient, less than one percent. system’s responsibilities to its community’s source New Jersey Department of Education Offi ce of Assessment source New Jersey Department of Education Offi ce of Assessment residents, graduation as a major indicator and Evaluation, 2001-02 to 2002-03; School Report Card, and Evaluation, 2001-02 to 2002-03; School Report Card, of educational success. In New Jersey, there 2001-02 to 2002-03 2001-02 to 2002-03 was no offi cial way to estimate graduation rates until recently. We estimated historical graduation rates using a cumulative promotion index.

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 39 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

Our estimate suggests that just over half figure 3.31 figure 3.32 (56%) of Trenton’s class of 2001–02 gradu- Cumulative Promotion Index by District Grouping, Graduation by Traditional Grade 11 Exam by District Grouping, ated from high school—about the same as 1998–99 to 2001–02 1994–95 to 2002–03 the estimated percentage three years earlier in 1998–99 (58%). In the interim years, Trenton’s cumulative promotion index was 100% 100% a great deal lower. A close inspection of the underlying information revealed consistent 80% 80% enrollment losses between Grades 9 and 10 in Trenton and enrollment gains in the upper 60% 60% grades. By this measure, high schools across the state have graduated about 80 percent of 40% 40% their students and the wealthiest districts have graduated about 90 percent. The cumulative 20% 20% promotion index in the other Abbott districts was 59 percent in 1998–99 and 63 percent in 0 0 2001–02. More needs to be done to assess true 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 graduation rates in New Jersey high schools. Trenton Trenton The indicator we present here and in other All Other Abbott Districts All Other Abbott Districts Abbott Indicators Reports estimates how many I and J Districts I and J Districts students graduate from high school in four New Jersey New Jersey years. By deﬁ nition, it does not fully capture increases caused by students who return to school after several years’ absence, even if the source Trenton Public Schools, 1998–99 to 2002–03 source Trenton Public Schools, 1999–00; School Report Card, students go on to graduate. Trenton began 1994-95 to 2002-03 its alternative high school program to address its high school dropout rate. The goal of the program is to bring over-age and adult students back to school and help them to earn their diplomas. Indeed, according to district reports, the number of high school graduates has increased in Trenton in each year since

40 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

K-12 Education 3

the program began. We have included an figure 3.33 Appendix memo from the district containing this information so that Trenton stakeholders Summary Table. Abbott K-12 Programs: Benchmark Status In Trenton can consider both indicators: the cumulative promotion index and the number of graduates from the district’s high schools. Benchmark Status Routes to Graduation. High school Kindergarten-Grade 3 maximum class size: 21 Met achievement tests assess if students have Grades 4 and 5 maximum class size: 23 Not Met mastered the content and skills outlined in Grades 6 through 12 maximum class size: 24 Not Met New Jersey’s Core Curriculum Content Stan- Abbott districts have funding parity with the I & J districts Met dards. Before 2001–02, it was assumed that Student to computer ratio is 5 to 1 Met graduating general education students mas- 2003-04 Grade 4 Achievement Tests*: For a school to make Adequate Yearly Met in: tered the content standards and passed a tra- Progress, each of 10 demographic subgroups had to have: 1) 95% test participa- Cadwalader tion; 2) 68% percent score at least profi cient in language arts literacy; AND 3) Jefferson ditional Grade 11 exam. Since then, New Jer- 53% score at least profi cient in math. Rivera sey high school students who fail one or more 2003-04 Grade 8 Achievement Tests: For a school to make Adequate Yearly Prog- Met in: sections of the traditional exam can still earn ress, each of 10 demographic subgroups had to have: 1) 95% test participation; Joyce Kilmer 2) 58% score at least profi cient in language arts literacy; AND 3) 39% score at a standard, academic diploma if they take and least profi cient in math. pass the alternative exam, the Special Review 2003-04 Grade 11 Achievement Tests: For a school to make Adequate Yearly Not Met Progress, each of 10 demographic subgroups had to have: 1) 95% test participa- Assessment (SRA). People disagree about tion; 2) 73% score at least profi cient in language arts literacy; AND 3) 55% score alternative routes to graduation like the SRA. at least profi cient in math. Critics argue that students must show that To avoid being considered “persistently dangerous”, schools must have an Elementary School: Met average of less than 7 or more Category “A” offenses for three consecutive years. Secondary School: Met they have mastered curriculum standards to To avoid being considered “persistently dangerous” schools must have an NCLB Elementary School: Met graduate from high school. Supporters praise Index rating less than 1. Secondary School: Met

New Jersey’s SRA and argue that states with * The New Jersey Department of Education provided 2003-04 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) data several months prior to releasing statewide 2003-04 achievement test scores. Therefore, we include the 2003-04 AYP data to provide readers with the most updated information available, while a single, high-stakes graduation test have a achievement test score data is only analyzed through 2002-03.

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 41 TRENTON

3 K-12 Education

strong incentive to push the students out of Endnotes school who cannot pass the test. We believe that the people of New Jersey can do both: 6. Federal law on “highly 8. As of school year 2004–05, qualifi ed teachers” applies to Abbott Parity Aid is known as maintain high academic standards and make teachers in the following “core Educational Opportunity Aid sure that all students have the opportunity to content areas:” English, reading (EOA) and Additional Abbott or language arts, mathematics, Aid is known as Discretionary earn academic diplomas. science, world languages, civics Educational Opportunity Aid and government, econom- (DEOA). In Trenton and the other Abbott districts the ics, arts (music, theatre, and percentage of students who graduated by pass- art), history, and geography. 9. The newly adopted regula- tion guiding penalizing school ing the traditional Grade 11 exam decreased New Jersey’s Core Curriculum Content Standards that align employees who falsify violence since 1994–95. In Trenton, 71 percent of the with these content areas are: and vandalism incident reports class of 1994–95 graduated after passing the language arts literacy, science, is New Jersey Administrative traditional exam. By 2002–03, only about 23 mathematics, social studies, Code 6:16, Section 5.3. percent graduated this way. world languages, and the visual 10. Here, a school is identi- and performing arts. fi ed as a high performer if its 7. Here, we focus on general general education students met education funding as the foun- or exceeded the profi ciency dation of a school district’s threshold set by the New Jersey budget. Most school districts Department of Education in also receive categorical aid compliance with the “adequate from the federal and/or state yearly progress” provision of governments to fund supportive the No Child Left Behind Act programs and services for stu- of 2001. dents with disabilities, English language learners, and other special needs populations.

42 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

School Facilities Construction

Many of New Jersey’s urban schools are unsafe, overcrowded, and unsuitable for helping students to achieve the Core Curriculum Content Standards. Under Abbott, the state is required to address this situation. In 2000, the legislature enacted the Abbott School Facilities Construction Program, with several key features. 4 TRENTON

4 School Facilities Construction

The key features include: Planning future educational needs, with a set Priority to health and safety repairs; minimum standards as a guideline; Long range plans developed by districts with Engaging parents and other community mem- community partners; bers in the process; and More classrooms to eliminate overcrowding; Planning for “swing space” while construction is under way. Space to provide preschool to all eligible three- and four-year-olds; The LRFP process was a unique chance 100 percent state-fi nanced for approved costs; for school districts to assess their existing and The LRFP process was a schools and, where needed, plan to build Schools to accommodate state-of-the-art unique chance for school teaching and learning. better ones to accommodate children’s needs and improved instructional practices. The development of the fi rst-round LRFPs did districts to assess their The First-Round Long-Range Facilities Plans not go very smoothly for a number of reasons. The fi rst step of the Abbott school facilities existing schools, and Most districts did not have enough time to construction program was to develop a dis- assess their current educational programs. trictwide Long-Range Facilities Plan (LRFP). where needed, plan to They also did not have the expertise to trans- The New Jersey Department of Education late educational practices into new building build better ones to ac- issued guidelines in September 1998 to help designs. school districts develop them. Districts’ fi nal commodate children’s plans were due to the state just six months Trenton’s fi rst-round long-range plan included a total of 24 projects. Ten of the original projects needs and improved later in March 1999. LRFP development in- were to be new schools; the remaining projects volved several procedures, including: were renovations or additions to existing schools. The district’s fi rst-round long-range instructional practice. Projecting future enrollments; plan was approved by the New Jersey Depart- Determining defi ciencies in every building; ment of Education. Assessing the safety and educational adequacy of current schools;

44 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

School Facilities Construction 4

Leadership Progress and Challenges figure 4.1 Facilities Advisory Board. Each Abbott dis- Progress. The ﬁ rst LRFPs in the state were trict was required by the New Jersey Depart- approved by the New Jersey Department of Trenton’s First-Round Facilities Plan Overview ment of Education’s guidelines to assemble Education in 2000; the most pressing health a facilities advisory board (FAB) to guide the and safety projects got seriously underway development of the LRFP. The board was to after Governor McGreevey created a new state PROJECTS include parents, teachers, principals, com- agency, the New Jersey Schools Construc- Number Percent munity representatives, an architect, an tion Corporation (SCC), to oversee the whole New Schools 10 41.7% Rehab/Additions 9 37.5% engineer, and a staff person from the New process in 2002.11,12 Conversion 5 20.8% Jersey Department of Education. The FAB’s For Abbott districts, LRFPs were developed Total 24 100.0% role was to review and reﬁ ne the recom- and approved by their school boards, and source Education Law Center communications with New Jersey Schools mendations made by an educational facilities then submitted to and approved by the New Construction Corporation, New Jersey Department of Education, specialist and architect and recommend the Jersey Department of Education. Once LRFPs and individual districts. plan for adoption by the school board. The are approved, districts prioritize projects and Education Law Center has recommended that submit them one by one to the New Jersey FABs continue to meet until plans are fully Department of Education. The Department of implemented to seek input and guide the dis- Education checks each project for compliance trictwide planning, design, and construction with the approved LRFP and the FES, and of school facilities. estimates project costs. Trenton’s Facilities Advisory Board is one of the From the outset, all parties acknowledged very few in the Abbott districts that continues that the Abbott school construction program to meet and function. would be a vast undertaking. As with any effort this size, it will take a long time. Many schools operate year-round and the district must have the space to provide an adequate

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 45 TRENTON

4 School Facilities Construction

educational program while facilities projects figure 4.2 figure 4.3 proceed. Even though the state ﬁ nances and Overview of Trenton’s Current Projects Status of Facilities Projects: Trenton & All Other oversees the process, the district must take Abbott Districts* great care in pacing the submission of its projects and moving them through the pipe- School Type Estimated All Other Completion Abbott line to completion. Trenton Districts Daylight/Twilight New Demonstration As of September 2004, 10 out of Trenton’s 24 NUMBER PERCENT PERCENT Project Unknown school construction projects were in the pipe- King/Jeff Pre-K-8 New School April 2005 To Be Submitted to NJDOE 14 58.3% 61.3% line toward completion: three were in design Roebling Pre-K-8 New School June 2007 Pre-Development 0 0.0% 19.7% and seven already under construction. Kilmer Pre-K-8 New School November 2005 In Design 3 12.5% 7.5% The progress made in Trenton in moving school construction projects forward is marked by Columbus Pre-K-8 New School November 2005 Construction Contract Awarded 7 29.2% 9.2% good efforts at eliciting community input and Mott Pre-K-8 Addition September 2004 Completed 0 0.0% 2.3% cooperation between the district and the city Parker Pre-K-8 Addition August 2005 government. Both factors have helped the dis- Total 24 100.0% 100.0% trict to move their projects through the pipeline PJ Hill Pre-K-8 Rehab November 2005 more quickly. Gregory Pre-K-8 Addition/Rehab June 2004 Trenton H.S. (1st phase) Addition/Rehab June 2009 Challenges. There are many ways for a school construction project to get hung up source Education Law Center communications with New Jersey Schools source Education Law Center communications with New Jersey Schools Construction Corporation, New Jersey Department of Education, Construction Corporation, New Jersey Department of Education, on its way to completion. The New Jersey and individual districts. and individual districts * As of September 2004 Department of Education and the district may disagree about spaces, forcing a prolonged series of negotiations. The SCC may determine, as a result of its own review, that the district should build a new school rather than renovate the existing one. The school district may have difﬁ culty getting the land needed to build new schools or the land may need

46 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

School Facilities Construction 4 to be remediated to ensure that it is safe for students and teachers. Endnotes

The Trenton Public Schools had some difﬁ culty 11. Abbott districts were 12. The SCC is a quasi-public acquiring land for a few projects, particularly in required to address emergency agency housed within the New securing adjacent lands for outdoor play areas school facilities defects which Jersey Economic Development and parking lots. The city assisted the district would directly affect the “health Authority. and safety” of children in these at one school site when it sold the land for a buildings. Health and safety parking lot for a nominal amount. For another projects include: roof repairs, project, the district mistakenly did not include window replacement, boiler a playground and parking lot in its original sub- repair, and asbestos removal. mission. The New Jersey Department of Educa- tion considered these stand-alone projects and did not approve them. Community reviewers also noted that one of the district’s most promising new projects—to be built on the former site of the Roebling steel cable factory—will need remediation by the New Jersey Department of Environmen- tal Protection before it is suitable for school construction. Although the standards for passing inspection are as high as for residential occupancy, some parents in the district remain concerned and will need to be convinced of the site’s safety.

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 47 TRENTON

Next Steps for Education Stakeholders

Next Steps For Education Stakeholders Take part. Attend local meetings and engage in conversations about what you learned with your neighbors, school and district staff, and Read the report. Try to make the time to read your school board members. the whole technical report: it contains a lot of Push for solutions. Remember the goal is to useful context and information. If you cannot, support school improvement. It is not enough read the summary report. Both are available to identify strengths and weaknesses. Once you on the Education Law Center website: www. talk about the ﬁ ndings with your neighbors, edlawcenter.org. decide what needs to be done and help make Talk about what you learned. Discuss what sure that it happens. you read with your friends, family, congregation Stay involved. School improvement is a mul- members, and work colleagues. tiyear investment. It will take your continued Dig deeper. Ask why and how. If you read about commitment. something that pleases or concerns you, learn more about why and how it came to be that way. Ask about quality. The indicators may tell you that a program or practice exists but not how well it is being implemented. Look at other sources of information. The Abbott Indicators are comprehensive, but not exhaustive. Other sources of information will be needed to get a clear idea of what the schools are doing. For example, low-performing schools undergo an external review process called Collaborative Assessment and Planning for Achievement (CAPA). If your school had a CAPA review, you can read the resulting report. Look for meeting announcements. Look for events and meetings where other people in your community will be discussing this report in particular or school improvement in general. You can ﬁ nd out about them on local television stations and in local newspapers.

48 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

Appendices TRENTON

Abbott Indicators List

Many of New Jersey’s urban schools are un- What student characteristics might affect Is the district providing a “high-quality” safe, overcrowded, and unsuitable for helping the nature and extent of services offered by preschool education to all eligible children? students to achieve the Core Curriculum the district? Programs for children with disabilities Content Standards. Under Abbott, the state Eligibility free-/reduced-price lunch • Preschool Child Study Team (CST) is required to address this situation. In 2000, Race/ethnicity Curriculum development the legislature enacted the Abbott School English language learners • Curricula used Facilities Construction Program, with several Students with disabilities • People involved key features. Immigrant students • Considerations/inputs to adoption Homelessness • Review frequency Student mobility rate • Alignment to Expectations The Community and Students Transition activities (into preschool and Kindergarten) What conditions of living and learning in the The Preschool Program Health and social services community served by the district might affect • Direct services offered children’s and youth’s readiness to learn? Opportunities for Students to Learn • Methods for assessment Female-headed households with children How close is the district to achieving universal • Referral methods Adult educational attainment enrollment for all three- and four- year-olds? • Transportation services Labor force participation Percent of preschool universe served ECERS-R quality scores Unemployment rate (Census/ASSA) Median household income Total preschool population served People living below poverty level Number of providers by type Children living below poverty level Waiting list Foreign-born population Head Start inclusion Rent-income ratio Outreach activities Vacant housing Identiﬁ cation of unserved families Violent crimes

50 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

Abbott Indicators List

Preschool Teacher Qualiﬁ cations and Informed and Inclusive Leadership K-12 Education Supports To what extent does the district’s ECEAC rep- Are preschool programs adequately staffed resent its stakeholders and participate in the Opportunities for Student Learning and are staff adequately supported? district’s early childhood program planning Do our schools provide high-quality instruc- Number of teachers and decision-making? tion in a range of content areas adequate Educational attainment of preschool teachers Early Childhood Education Advisory Council to ensure that students can meet content Preschool teacher certiﬁ cation (ECEAC) standards? • Representation Preschool teacher experience Whole School Reform • Training Preschool teacher salary • Model chosen • Frequency of meetings Performance evaluation • Approval of model • Involvement in program planning, Professional development opportunities • Year adopted budgeting, and facilities planning • Criteria • Reason for adoption • Other activities • Methods • Adoption procedures • Joint preschool-Kindergarten professional Class size development Student Outcomes Programs for children with disabilities Have preschool students developed the skills Curriculum development Adequate Resources they will need to continue to learn and • Curricula used Are the preschool programs adequately develop in Kindergarten? • People involved funded? Assessment methods used • Considerations/inputs to adoption • Review frequency Preschool budget PPVT-III or ELAS scores • Method for ensuring alignment across grade levels College preparatory course • AP courses • AP course eligibility • Availability of college preparatory sequence (math and science)

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 51 TRENTON

Abbott Indicators List

Student and Family Supports K-12 Teacher Qualifi cations and Supports Informed and Inclusive Leadership Is the school providing programs and services Are our schools adequately staffed and Do our schools and does our district have to support students’ well-being and academic supported? adequate and representative leadership? performance in accordance with demon- Student-teacher ratio School Leadership Councils strated need? Faculty attendance • Representation of stakeholder groups Full day Kindergarten Highly qualifi ed teachers • Training in roles and responsibilities • Class size Abbott staffi ng patterns • Frequency of meetings Early literacy Professional development • Involvement in planning and budgeting • 90-minute reading blocks • Description of instructionally-linked, • Other activities curriculum-specifi c training • Small group/one-on-one tutoring Abbott Advisory Council • Inputs to selecting professional development Health and social services • Representation of stakeholder groups opportunities • Referral and coordination • Frequency of meetings Performance evaluation criteria and methods • On-site services • Involvement in planning and budgeting Frequency of teacher networking and • Other activities Nutrition program collaboration Access to technology Other teacher supports Student-computer ratio K-12 Student Outcomes Alternative education program Adequate Resources How physically, socially, and emotionally College and work transition programs healthy are our children? After-school programs Are our schools adequately funded? Child death Summer programs Property wealth Teen death Art and Music programs Local tax rates • Average tax rates Teen births Are strategies in place to ensure effective • School tax rates Substantiated abuse and neglect cases parent outreach and involvement? General education budget School violence and vandalism rates Parent involvement policies and practices Supplemental programs budget Additional Abbott Aid application process

52 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

Abbott Indicators List

Are all students in Kindergarten to grade College Entrance To what extent is there adequate, represen- 12 learning according to statewide standards? • SAT participation tative leadership that encourages meaningful Student attendance • Verbal and math mean scores public participation for school facilities plan- Suspension rates ning and project implementation? Grade 4 Language Arts Literacy and Math Facilities Advisory Board Assessments School Facilities Construction • Representation of stakeholder groups • Mean scores Healthy, Safe and Educationally Adequate • Frequency of meeting (beyond LRFP • Profi ciency percentages submission) Schools • AYP status • Involvement in plan development Grade 8 Language Arts Literacy and Math What are the district’s long-range facilities • Transparency to public Assessments plans? • Other activities • Mean scores LRFP approval status • Profi ciency percentages Number and type of planned projects • AYP status Process of development Grade 11 Language Arts Literacy and Math Assessments How much progress has been made toward • Mean scores completing educational facilities projects in • Profi ciency percentages the districts? • AYP status Plans to upgrade preschool facilities High and low performing schools Status of projects (complete, construction, Kindergarten through grade 2 design, predevelopment, not yet submitted) • Early Language Assessment System scores Estimated completion dates • Terra Nova Edition 2, where available Cooperation with municipal partners Graduation Community input • Estimated rates (cumulative Barriers to progress promotion index) • Graduation via HSPA • Graduation via SRA

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 53 TRENTON

District and Community Reviewer Letters

54 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

Acknowledgements

The Abbott Indicators Reports were created Foundation Support Willa Spicer, New Jersey Performance Assessment through the efforts of a great many contribu- The Abbott Indicators Project is funded by Alliance Irene Sterling, Paterson Education Fund tors. We list those contributors below, with The Rockefeller Foundation, The Geraldine Marla Ucelli, Annenberg Institute for School apologies to the inevitable few whom we R. Dodge Foundation, The Prudential Foun- Reform inadvertently left out. dation, The William Penn Foundation, The Kathy Weaver, Newark Alliance This report was written by Lesley Hirsch Victoria Foundation, and The Fund for New Junius Williams, Abbott Leadership Institute and Erain Applewhite-Coney, Psy.D, Co-Di- Jersey. rectors of the Abbott Indicators Project at the School District Information, Interviews, Education Law Center. Letitia Logan of the Statewide Project Steering Committee and Access Education Law Center also made signiﬁ cant W. Steven Barnett, Ph.D., National Institute for We wish to extend special thanks to the many contributions to the writing. Early Education Research Jose Delgado individuals at the Trenton Public Schools Project consultant Alex Schuh, Ph.D. and Bari A. Erlichson, Ph.D. without whose assistance and support this re- project co-directors, Erain Applewhite-Co- Margaret Goertz, Ph.D., Consortium for Policy port would not have come together. Individu- ney, Psy.D. and Lesley Hirsch conducted the Research in Education als who provided access to critical informa- Trenton interviews. Lesley Hirsch and Letitia Rosie Grant, Paterson Education Fund tion were: Logan collected and analyzed all data with Edward Greene, Ph.D., E. M. Greene Associates Kelly Creque, Director, Assessment and Account- guidance and assistance from Judith Pollack Herbert Green, Director, Public Education Institute ability and Michael Weiss, of Educational Testing Daniel Gutmore, Ph.D., Seton Hall College of Edu- Everene Downing, Director, Teaching and Learning cation and Human Services Services, Inc. Monique Harvey, Homeless Liaison Jerome Harris, CAMConnect Margaret Herbert, Supervisor, Early Childhood Cynthia Esposito Lamy, Ed.D., National Institute Education Design for Early Education Research Prudence Hope-Wade, Coordinator, School Infor- The Abbott Indicator Reports were Prakash Nair, REFP, Fielding-Nair International, mation Management designed and produced by Kinetik, Inc. of Great Schools New Jersey Kathryn Howard, Data Specialist Michael Nettles, Ph.D., Educational Testing Service Washington, DC. James H. Lytle, Ph.D., Superintendent Cynthia Savo, Cynergy Associates LLC Lillian Occhipinti, Director, Bilingual Education Melvin Wyns, Business Administrator

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 55 TRENTON

Acknowledgements

Our appreciation also goes to the follow- Washington School: Gail Cropper and Mary Ann Division of Student Services ing individuals who were generous with their Delate Special Education: Stacey Pellegrino and Andrew time and information in granting interviews Samson Title I Program Planning and Accountability: John State Data Sources to project staff: R. Ingersoll, Ph.D. Everett Collins, Facilities Manager We must express our appreciation for the Program Support Services: Thomas Collins, Ph.D. Kelly Creque, Director, Assessment and Account- patient support and cooperation of the many Deputy Commissioner ability individuals who supplied a lion’s share of the Public Information: Barbara Molnar, Faith Saraﬁ n, Everene Downing, Director, Teaching and Learning information presented in this report. Thanks and Quansheng Shen Margaret Herbert, Supervisor, Early Childhood go to Dennis Smeltzer of the Commission on Education Business Efﬁ ciency in the Public Schools; Report Reviewers James H. Lytle, Ph.D., Superintendent Nancy Parello and Cecilia Traini of the As- Finally, several individuals have reviewed Dwayne Mosley, Director, Abbott Facilities Con- sociation for Children of New Jersey. and given input to this Indicators Report. The struction Special appreciation goes to the following report underwent internal review by Educa- Melvin Wyns, Business Administrator individuals at the New Jersey Department of tion Law Center subject-matter experts, Ellen We also wish to thank the principals and SLC Education: Boylan, Ruth Lowenkron, and Joan Ponessa; chairs of the following schools who provided Division of Abbott Implementation project advisory committee members Cynthia access to their schools and spoke with us Program Planning and Design: Annette Castiglio- Lamy, Ed.D., Bari Erlichson, Ph.D., Marga- ne, Marlene Lebak, Peter Noehrenberg about their ongoing school reform efforts: ret Goertz, Ph.D., and Cynthia Savo; and our Early Childhood Education: Karin Garver Gregory School: Judy Steele and Doris Mottley colleague at The Rockefeller Foundation, Fred Fiscal Review and Improvement: Glenn Forney and Martin Luther King Middle School: Marzene Ben- Pete Genovese Frelow. Education Law Center Executive Di- nett and Judith Cartwright Division of Finance rector, David Sciarra, and Assistant Managing Parker School: Willie Solomon and Kathy Flowers School Funding: Alan Dupree and Garry Everson Director, Theresa Luhm tirelessly reviewed Rivera School: Joseph Marazzo and Jeanne Ter- Division of Educational Programs and Assessment all of the reports and gave their support and nowchek Evaluation and Assessment: Timothy Peters advice throughout their development. Trenton Central High School: Priscilla Dawson and Janice Williams

56 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON

Acknowledgements

At each pilot site, we provided district staff Chris Ritter, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory with the draft report for review and assembled Joe Santo, Vice President, Trenton Education an all-volunteer community review team. All Association reviewers were invited to recommend chang- Emerson Simmons, Parent Activist and SLC es. We incorporated some of their changes, Member, P.J. Hill Elementary School and invited reviewers to include any other The comprehensiveness and usefulness of changes in a letter. If submitted, these letters this report is a testament to the many contri- are included in an Appendix to this report. In butions listed here. Any errors or omissions Trenton, the community-based review team are, of course, the full responsibility of the members were as follows: primary authors. Ana Berdecia, Thomas Edison State College Kelly Creque, Director, Assessment and Account- ability, Trenton Public Schools Tyrone Gaskins, Trenton NAACP Coreen Grooms, President, Parent Action Aware- ness Resource Center Mary Ann Jandoli, Associate Director of Research and Economic Services, New Jersey Education Association Karin McBride, Parent, Kilmer Elementary School Denise Millington, Liaison Committee of the Trenton PTA/PTO and SLC Member

EDUCATION LAW CENTER TRENTON ABBOTT INDICATORS SUMMARY REPORT 57 TRENTON

About the Education Law Center

The Education Law Center (ELC) was estab- by foundational funding equal to New Jersey’s in disputes involving K-12 public educa- lished in 1973 to advocate on behalf of New most afﬂ uent suburbs; supplemental fund- tion. Because demand for SRP’s services far Jersey’s public school children for access to ing for programs that address the social and exceeds attorney resources, SRP gives priority an equal and adequate education under state health needs of students, whole school re- to low-income students who attend school in and federal laws. ELC works to improve edu- form; school based management; high quality poor urban or rural districts. cational opportunities for low-income stu- preschool for all three and four year olds; and dents and students with disabilities through safe and educationally adequate school facili- Please direct any questions about this report public education, policy initiatives, research, ties. ELC’s successes in Abbott have resulted or the Abbott Indicators Project to: communications and, when necessary, legal in an additional $800 million in foundational action. state aid each year for the Abbott districts Lesley Hirsch or ELC serves as counsel to the plaintiffs and schools, $300 million in preschool aid, Erain Applewhite-Coney, Psy.D. in the Abbott v. Burke case—more than and $6 billion in school construction funds. 300,000 preschool and school-age children The New York Times editorialized that Abbott Education Law Center in 31 urban school districts throughout New represents “the most important equal educa- 60 Park Place, Suite 300 Jersey. Through the Abbott decisions, the tion ruling since Brown v. Board of Educa- Newark, NJ 07102 New Jersey Supreme Court has established an tion” (April 30, 2002). 973–624–1815 unprecedented legal framework of remedial ELC also operates the Student Rights email: [email protected] or measures to assure the rights of urban public Project (SRP) to protect the educational [email protected] school children to an adequate education. The rights of all students, focusing on students remedies ordered by the Court include stan- with disabilities. SRP is the only non-proﬁ t, dards-based education and reform supported legal assistance program in New Jersey that specializes in education law and provides free legal representation to income-eligible parents, guardians and caregivers of students

58 TRACKING PROGRESS, ENGAGING COMMUNITIES EDUCATION LAW CENTER

EDUCATION LAW CENTER

60 PARK PLACE SUITE 3 0 0 NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 07102