Tag: School

  • Why this New Jersey school requires parents to volunteer

    Why this New Jersey school requires parents to volunteer

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    At LEAP Academy University School — a K-12 public charter school in Camden, N.J. — parents are required to volunteer at the school for 40 hours over the academic year. 

    School officials say volunteer engagement builds strong home-school connections and helps LEAP — which stands for Leadership, Education and Partnership — better understand and respond to parents’ needs. Parents, meanwhile, say volunteering gives them more voice and authority in school activities and helps build trust among the school community.

    “The child sees that the parent trusts the school, and the parent is learning from the school and getting resources from the school,” says Cheree Coleman, a parent of rising 8th and 9th graders. “So now the student looks at the school like, ‘This is family. This is a place that I can go if I can’t get help from my parents or, you know, other resources.’ It’s stability.”

    The school works with families to try to ensure the 40-hour requirement is not burdensome. Maria Cruz, director of LEAP’s Parent Engagement Center, says school leaders work with each family to find ways for them to help out within their own schedules or situations. Students’ relatives can also contribute to the families’ volunteer hours.

    Volunteer hours can be gained by participating in any event at the 1,560-student school, including reading to students, planning special events, fundraising, attending parent workshops, serving on committees, sending emails to school groups, or any other activity that supports school efforts.

    Cruz adds that while the school tracks the volunteer hours, no student would lose their spot if their family failed to meet the 40 hours. 

    “We work with them” to fill the hours, Cruz says. “We don’t tell them that the volunteer hours are mandatory. The word ‘mandatory’ is kind of like a negative term for them, so we don’t use it. We talk to them, let them know that the reason why we’re doing the volunteer hours is so they can be engaged in the school.”

    The school, founded in 1997, has a long history of parent engagement, says Stephanie Weaver-Rogers, LEAP’s chief operation officer. “We opened based on parent needs so parents have always been integral and we are very focused on having parents involved in every aspect of the school.”

    A room full of adults and a few children are sitting on chairs and at tables looking at a speaker.

    Parents attend a workshop on special education topics at LEAP Academy University School in Camden, N.J. in May 2025.

    Permission granted by LEAP Academy University School

     

    Educating students and parents

    In addition to volunteering, the school engages parents through workshops specifically for them. Held weekly at the school, these optional parent workshops offer learning on a variety of topics and skills, such as homeownership, English language, employment, nutrition and technology.

    Along with the free classes, parents get dinner, child care and parking also at no charge, Cruz says. She and other school staff work to recruit experts in the community — including other parents — to lead the classes.

    The skills-based classes help parents “move forward” in their lives “and also help them better themselves for their children,” Weaver-Rogers says.

    To further parent engagement efforts, the school encourages parents to apply for open positions, but Cruz noted that hires are made based on skills, experience and job fit. Currently, approximately 10-15% of LEAP staff are parents of current or former students. 

    Having parents on staff has several benefits, Weaver-Rogers said. It can give parents “a step up economically.” Plus, students behave better knowing their parents or their friends’ parents are in the building.

    “It’s an all-around win,” Weaver-Rogers says.

    An adult stands with two students in a school hallway. Everyone is looking at the camera

    Cheree Coleman and her daughters Cy’Lah Coleman (left) and Ca’Layla Coleman attend a school ceremony on May 29, 2024, at LEAP Academy University School in Camden, N.J.

    Permission granted by Cheree Coleman

     

    Coleman, who worked at the school as a parent ambassador for three years, adds, “What I love the most when it comes to the parent engagement with LEAP Academy is the fact that they don’t just educate the student, they educate the parents as well.”

    Being engaged in the community

    The home-school connections at LEAP don’t end at graduation. The school, which has four buildings within two blocks, makes efforts to stay in touch with and support alumni through job awareness efforts, networking opportunities and resources for struggling families.

    Coleman says LEAP staff and families have also supported students and families in need at other schools in the community. 

    The school opens its doors to the public for certain school events and celebrations — for instance, with community organizations and government service providers setting up information tables, Cruz says.

    Hector Nieves, a member of the school’s board of trustees and chair of the parent affairs committee, says parents are encouraged to bring friends, neighbors and family to some school get-togethers, especially those held outside to accommodate larger crowds. “We have music. We have all kinds of games for the kids. There’s dancing,” he says. 

    Cruz added that this “all are welcome” approach helps the school recruit new students, too.

    Four young students in school uniforms are holding plastic bags and looking at the camera. They are standing in front of a table with items.

    The whole school community participates in LEAP Academy University School’s holiday fundraiser, last held Dec. 5-14, 2024, at the school in Camden, N.J.

    Permission granted by LEAP Academy University School

     

    Additionally, LEAP’s partnership with Rutgers University provides support to families for their children from birth through postsecondary education. LEAP is located along Camden’s “Education Corridor,” which includes campuses for Rutgers University-Camden and Rowan University. Both Rutgers and Rowan provide dual enrollment, early college access and other learning opportunities for LEAP students.

    Nieves, who had three children graduate from LEAP — including one who now teaches English at the school — says the holistic approach of serving students and families has empowered the school community over the years and helped families improve their financial situations.

    “I believe that somehow, whether they came and worked here, we gave them classes, we helped them along, all of a sudden, I see this growth,” says Nieves. “I believe we had a lot to do with that.”

    Source link

  • A smarter way to manage public dollars

    A smarter way to manage public dollars

    Key points:

    For public school districts across Florida and much of the country, employee benefits–particularly health insurance–are among the largest and fastest-growing budget line items. But too often, decision-makers in these districts manage benefits with incomplete information, little visibility into vendor practices, and limited tools for addressing escalating costs.

    Part of the problem is the complexity of the healthcare delivery system itself. The supply chain encompasses numerous moving parts, making cost drivers challenging to identify. While not intentional, school districts need to both educate and empower their agents and their team of specialists to peel back the layers that create added costs. Districts must also be willing to look inward.

    One of the real secrets to cost containment is transparency. A committed school district that wants to take control of its program must first understand its strengths and weaknesses, then fill gaps with specialists who can uncover hidden costs–an ongoing, vigilant effort that reveals the actual sources of waste and inefficiency. These efforts include transparent procurement and optimizing deal tension, as well as pharmacy contract negotiation, claims repricing, claims redirection, and more. Only then can districts make informed, strategic decisions that control costs and improve outcomes.

    The cost of opaque processes

    The result is a system that too often lacks meaningful transparency. School boards are presented with insurance renewals but not the data behind cost increases, insights into why claims costs are as they are, or guidance on how to contain them. Carriers field calls from district employees, but little to no reporting is returned to help the district understand what’s driving service demand. Without actionable data and intelligence, many districts default to passive renewals, accepting annual rate hikes without a clear strategy to contain costs or improve the employee experience.

    Building a foundation for smart decision‑making

    It doesn’t have to be this way. True transparency–in procurement, data, and intelligence–is not just a matter of regulatory compliance; it’s the foundation for smarter decision-making, better benefits engagement, and long-term cost control. When school districts gain access to previously unavailable data and unfiltered insights into how their benefits programs are performing, they can better serve their educators and protect their budgets.

    One example is call utilization data. Many school boards have no visibility into how often–and why–their employees contact their insurance carriers. Without this insight, they may not realize, for instance, that a large number of calls could pertain to prescription benefit confusion–something they could address through targeted employee education or plan redesign. Transparency in that data enables the district to act rather than react. It transforms benefits management from a cycle of guesswork into a proactive strategy, where decisions are driven by real needs rather than assumptions.

    Beyond call utilization, pharmacy and provider network fees can quietly escalate into six- or seven-figure losses if not monitored. Pharmacy contracts in particular demand negotiation by seasoned experts who understand the contractual nuances and levers that drive real savings. Ideally, a benefits partner will have a pharmacy benefits consultant or Doctor of Pharmacy on staff to review contracts and formularies line by line. Likewise, provider network claims and therapies must be benchmarked against competitive pricing. Transparency in these areas unleashes competition, and competition drives costs down.

    Operationalizing and incentivizing transparency leads to cost containment

    When a school district commits to operationalizing and incentivizing transparency, it can start to regain control of its costs. This process begins with examining the bigger picture of why and how the health-delivery supply chain can be leveraged or disintermediated to produce better outcomes. District leaders realize they have the power to effect change. Superintendents, HR, and finance departments can work in unison to embed transparency by empowering and incentivizing their benefits consultants to focus on solutions that reduce the district’s costs. This includes aligning agent compensation models with the district’s cost-containment roadmap.

    Equally important is how this transparency gets operationalized. Most small- to mid-sized school districts don’t have the staff or resources to analyze claims trends, facilitate wellness programs, or manage a complex benefits ecosystem. That’s why some are turning to outside partners to act as an extension of their internal team–not just as benefits brokers but as collaborative advisors who help design, implement, and maintain smarter benefits strategies. The difference is night and day: Instead of a transactional approach focused solely on renewals, these partners bring a year-round, data-driven mindset to benefits administration.

    Reclaiming control through radical transparency

    Ultimately, it’s about control. For too long, many public entities have ceded control of their benefits strategy to intermediaries operating behind closed doors. Radical transparency flips the script. It empowers school districts to take ownership of their benefits programs to lower costs and improve outcomes for the people they serve.

    That change doesn’t happen overnight. It starts with asking better questions:

    • Do we receive actionable data on employee engagement and utilization, and are we using it to drive measurable change?
    • Is our procurement process fully competitive and transparent, or are outdated practices perpetuating the status quo?
    • Do we have the tools and thought leadership from our broker to act on these insights?
    • Is our broker delivering transparent, cost-containment strategies, and are those solutions proven to reduce expense?
    • Are we empowered by a partnership structured around ROI?
    • Are we incentivizing our broker and vendor partners to prioritize ROI, transparency and ongoing savings?
    • Is our internal team contributing to transparency, data analysis and ROI? If not, what organizational changes are needed?

    The answers may be uncomfortable, but they’re necessary for reclaiming control. And in today’s fiscal climate, where every dollar matters and expectations for good governance are higher than ever, doing what’s always been done is no longer good enough.

    Transparency is more than a buzzword. It’s a path to fiscal responsibility, employee trust, and strategic clarity. And for public school districts facing mounting healthcare costs, it may be the smartest investment they can make.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • 6 steps to transforming parent engagement, one message at a time

    6 steps to transforming parent engagement, one message at a time

    Key points:

    When you open the doors to a brand-new school, you’re not just filling classrooms, you’re building a community from the ground up. In August 2023, I opened our Pre-K through 4th grade school in Charlotte, North Carolina, to alleviate overcrowding at several East Charlotte campuses. As the founding principal, I knew that fostering trust and engagement with families was as essential as hiring great teachers or setting academic goals.

    Many of our students were transitioning from nearby schools, and their families were navigating uncertainty and change. My top priority was to create a strong home-school connection from the very beginning–one rooted in transparency, inclusivity, and consistent communication, where every parent feels like a valued partner in our new school’s success. Since then, we’ve added 5th grade and continue to grow our enrollment as we shape the identity of our school community.

    Up until two years ago, our district was primarily using a legacy platform for our school-to-home communication. It was incredibly limiting, and I didn’t like using it. The district then switched to a new solution, which helped us easily reach out to families (whose children were enrolling at the new elementary school) with real-time alerts and two-way messaging.

    The difference between the two systems was immediately obvious and proved to be a natural transition for me. This allowed us to take a direct, systematic, and friendlier approach to our school-home communications as we implemented the new system.

    Building strong home-school bonds

    Here are the steps we took to ensure a smooth adoption process, and some of the primary ways we use the platform:

    1. Get everyone on board from the start. We used comprehensive outreach with families through flyers, posters, and dedicated communication at open-house events. At the same time, our teachers were easily rostered–a process simplified by a seamless integration with our student information system–and received the necessary training on the platform.
    1. Introduce the new technology as a “familiar tool.” We framed our ParentSquare tool as a “closed social media network” for school-home communication. This eased user adoption and demystified the technology by connecting it to existing social habits. Our staff emphasized that if users could communicate socially online, they could also easily use the platform for school-related interactions.
    1. Promote equity with automatic translation. With a student population that’s about 50 percent Hispanic and with roughly 22 different languages represented across the board, we were very interested in our new platform’s automatic translation capabilities (which currently span more than 190 languages). Having this process automated has vastly reduced the amount of time and number of headaches involved with creating and sharing newsletters and other materials with parents.
    1. Streamline tasks and reduce waste. I encourage staff to create their newsletters in the communications platform versus reverting to PDFs, paper, or other formats for information-sharing. That way, the platform can manage the automatic translation and promote effective engagement with families. This is an equity issue that we have to continue working on both in our school and our district as a whole. It’s about making sure that all parents have access to the same information regardless of their native language.
    1. Centralize proof of delivery. We really like having the communication delivery statistics, which staff can use to confirm message receipt–a crucial feature when parents claim they didn’t receive information. The platform shows when a message was received, providing clear confirmation that traditional paper handouts can’t match. Having one place where all of those communications can be sent, seen, and delivered is extremely helpful.
    1. Manage events and boost engagement. The platform keeps us organized, and we especially like the calendar and post functions (and use both a lot). Being able to sort specific groups is great. We use that feature to plan events like staggered kindergarten entry and separate open houses; it helps us target communications precisely. For a recent fifth-grade promotion ceremony, for example, we managed RSVPs and volunteer sign-ups directly through the communications platform, rather than using an external tool like Sign-Up Genius. 

    Modernizing school-family outreach

    We always want to make it easy for families to receive, consume, and respond to our messages, and our new communications platform helps us achieve that goal. Parents appreciate receiving notifications via email, app, voice, or text–a method we use a lot for sending out reminders. 

    This direct communication is particularly impactful given our diverse student population, with families speaking many different languages. Teachers no longer need third-party translation sites or manual cut-and-paste methods because the platform handles automatic translation seamlessly. It’s helped us foster deeper family engagement and bridge communication gaps we otherwise couldn’t–it’s really amazing to see.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • A practical guide for sourcing edtech

    A practical guide for sourcing edtech

    Key points:

    Virtual reality field trips now enable students to explore the Great Wall of China, the International Space Station, and ancient Rome without leaving the classroom.  Gamified online learning platforms can turn lessons into interactive challenges that boost engagement and motivation. Generative AI tutors are providing real-time feedback on writing and math assignments, helping students sharpen their skills with personalized support in minutes.

    Education technology is accelerating at a rapid pace–and teachers are eager to bring these digital tools to the classroom. But with pandemic relief funds running out, districts are having to make tougher decisions around what edtech they can afford, which vendors will offer the greatest value, and, crucially, which tools come with robust cybersecurity protections.

    Although educators are excited to innovate, school leaders must weigh every new app or online platform against cybersecurity risks and the responsibility of protecting student data. Unfortunately, those risks remain very real: 6 in 10 K-12 schools were targeted by ransomware in 2024.

    Cybersecurity is harder for some districts than others

    The reality is that school districts widely vary when it comes to their internal resources, cybersecurity expertise, and digital maturity.

    A massive urban system may have a dedicated legal department, CISO, and rigid procurement processes. In a small rural district, the IT lead might also coach soccer or direct the school play.

    These discrepancies leave wide gaps that can be exploited by security threats. Districts are often improvising vetting processes that vary wildly in rigor, and even the best-prepared system struggles to know what “good enough” looks like as technology tools rapidly accelerate and threats evolve just as fast.

    Whether it’s apps for math enrichment, platforms for grading, or new generative AI tools that promise differentiated learning at scale, educators are using more technology than ever. And while these digital tools are bringing immense benefits to the classroom, they also bring more threat exposure. Every new tool is another addition to the attack surface, and most school districts are struggling to keep up.

    Districts are now facing these critical challenges with even fewer resources. With the U.S. Department of Education closing its Office of EdTech, schools have lost a vital guidepost for evaluating technology tools safely. That means less clarity and support, even as the influx of new tech tools is at an all-time high.

    But innovation and protection don’t have to be in conflict. Schools can move forward with digital tools while still making smart, secure choices. Their decision-making can be supported by some simple best practices to help guide the way.

    5 green flags for evaluating technology tools

    New School Safety Resources

    With so many tools entering classrooms, knowing how to assess their safety and reliability is essential. But what does safe and trustworthy edtech actually look like?

    You don’t need legal credentials or a cybersecurity certification to answer that question. You simply need to know what to look for–and what questions to ask. Here are five green flags that can guide your decisions and boost confidence in the tools you bring into your classrooms.

    1. Clear and transparent privacy policies

    A strong privacy policy should be more than a formality; it should serve as a clear window into how a tool handles data. The best ones lay out exactly what information is collected, why it’s needed, how it’s used, and who it’s shared with, in plain, straightforward language.

    You shouldn’t need legal training to make sense of it. Look for policies that avoid vague, catch-all phrases and instead offer specific details, like a list of subprocessors, third-party services involved, or direct contact information for the vendor’s privacy officer. If you can’t quickly understand how student data is being handled, or if the vendor seems evasive when you ask, that’s cause for concern.

    1. Separation between student and adult data

    Student data is highly personal, extremely sensitive, and must be treated with extra care. Strong vendors explicitly separate student data from educator, administrator, and parent data in their systems, policies, and user experiences.

    Ask how student data is accessed internally and what safeguards are in place. Does the vendor have different privacy policies for students versus adults? If they’ve engineered that distinction into their platform, it’s a sign they’ve thought deeply about your responsibilities under FERPA and COPPA.

    1. Third-party audits and certifications

    Trust, but verify. Look for tools that have been independently evaluated through certifications like the Common Sense Privacy Seal, iKeepSafe, or the 1EdTech Trusted App program. These external audits validate that privacy claims and company practices are tested against meaningful standards and backed up by third-party validation.

    Alignment with broader security frameworks like NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF), ISO 27001, or SOC 2 can add another layer of assurance, especially in states where district policies lean heavily on these benchmarks. These technical frameworks should complement radical transparency. The most trustworthy vendors combine certification with transparency: They’ll show you exactly what they collect, how they store it, and how they protect it. That openness–and a willingness to be held accountable–is the real marker of a privacy-first partner.

    1. Long-term commitment to security and privacy

    Cybersecurity shouldn’t be a one-and-done checklist. It’s a continual practice. Ask vendors how they approach ongoing risks: Do they conduct regular penetration testing? Is a formal incident response plan in place? How are teams trained on phishing threats and secure coding?

    If they follow a framework like the NIST CSF, that’s great. But also dig into how they apply it: What’s their track record for patching vulnerabilities or communicating breaches? A real commitment shows up in action, not just alignment.

    1. Data minimization and purpose limitations

    Trustworthy technology tools collect only what’s essential–and vendors can explain why they need it. If you ask, “Why do you collect this data point?” they should have a direct answer that ties back to functionality, not future marketing.

    Look for platforms that commit to never repurposing student data for behavioral ad targeting. Also, ask about deletion protocols: Can data be purged quickly and completely if requested? If not, it’s time to ask why.

    Laying the groundwork for a safer school year

    Cybersecurity doesn’t require a 10-person IT team or a massive budget. Every district, no matter the size, can take meaningful, manageable steps to reduce risk, establish guardrails, and build trust.

    Simple, actionable steps go a long way: Choose tools that are transparent about data use, use trusted frameworks and certifications as guideposts, and make cybersecurity training a regular part of staff development. Even small efforts , like a five-minute refresher on phishing during back-to-school sessions, can have an outsized impact on your district’s overall security posture.

    For schools operating without deep resources or internal expertise, this work is especially urgent–and entirely possible. It just requires knowing where to start.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • A sportswear brand vs. an Ivy League school: Columbia sues Columbia

    A sportswear brand vs. an Ivy League school: Columbia sues Columbia

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • Columbia Sportswear is suing Columbia University for trademark infringement, unfair competition and breach of contract, according to court documents filed last week.
    • Attorneys for Columbia Sportswear say the university is in breach of a written agreement between the parties over the sale of apparel merchandise. The two groups entered a written agreement in 2023 that the university would not use the “Columbia” name alone.
    • Last year, Columbia University’s webstore offered for sale shirts, sweatshirts and hats that bare the word “Columbia” on its own, which attorneys for Columbia Sportswear say violate the contract and its trademark rights.

    Dive Insight:

    Columbia Sportswear is seeking a jury trial in the complaint against Columbia University. It also asks that the university be prevented from using the trademark name alone on apparel and accessories, along with recalling any such products currently in the university’s possession. The brand also is seeking monetary damages.

    In 2023, the sportswear company said the two groups entered a written agreement whereby the university could use the “Columbia” name, for which the sportswear company has a trademark, if the name was used with one other distinguishing mark associated with the university, such as its shield, crown or lion mascot logo, or words, such as “university,” “Columbia Law,” or its year of founding.

    The lawsuit was filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. Columbia Sportswear is headquartered in Portland, Oregon. 

    Some of the Columbia University apparel mentioned in the lawsuit include the Nike and Champion logos, which attorneys for Columbia Sportswear say can create customer confusion and a false association between Columbia Sportswear and its competitors.

    A Columbia University sweatshirt with the Nike emblem.

    An example of Columbia University’s allegedly infringing products.

    Retrieved from Court Filing.

     

    “Though Columbia Sportswear and Nike are headquartered in the same State and are both highly reputable sporting apparel designers and have a generally friendly relationship, the two companies have never collaborated to jointly design, manufacture, market, or sell any product,” the complaint says. “A consumer looking at the Infringing Merchandise would never know that, and, in fact, would reasonably be induced into believing the companies had.”

    A Columbia University spokesperson declined to comment on the pending litigation.

    It’s likely that this case will be settled out of court, and fairly quickly, said Josh Gerben, trademark attorney and founder of Gerben IP law firm.

    However, “if Columbia Sportswear’s version of the story in the complaint is not entirely accurate, and Columbia University decides to defend the case, things could get interesting,” Gerben said in an email. “This is because Columbia University has been around much longer than Columbia Sportswear. It gives the university some very interesting defenses to the overall claims regarding trademark infringement.”

    Columbia Sportswear is set to announce its second quarter earnings Thursday. In Q1, the company reported a net sales increase of 1% to $778.5 million. At the time of the announcement, the company withdrew its full-year financial outlook due to economic uncertainty related to tariffs.

    Source link

  • The details behind the first national school voucher program

    The details behind the first national school voucher program

    After decades of trying, conservatives this year succeeded in creating the first national school voucher program.

    The Republican megabill that President Donald Trump signed into law in July will establish new tax credit scholarships for families to use at private schools, including religious ones — a long-held goal of school privatization advocates who argue parents should get taxpayer support if they want to opt out of their neighborhood school.

    Under the “big, beautiful bill,” donors can receive dollar-for-dollar tax credits of up to $1,700 for contributions to scholarship-granting nonprofits. Those groups then distribute the money to families seeking help paying for private school, tutoring and other educational expenses. 

    The program, while significant, is less expansive than in earlier drafts of the legislation. Previous versions gave donors larger tax credits — a match up to $5,000 or 10 percent of their income, whichever is greater — and mandated that all states participate rather than allowing them to opt in. 

    Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education.

    Here are 10 things to know about the program. If you have other questions or there’s more you’d like to know, write to us: [email protected].

    When does it start?

    Jan. 1, 2027. Families have until then to research where they might want to spend a scholarship — and if the school in mind even plans to accept one. Taxpayers who want to contribute to support the scholarships can do so beginning in late 2026.  

    How will the scholarships work?

    The law opens the door to churches, universities, education nonprofits, rotary clubs and potentially even public schools (more on that below) to accept and distribute donations for the program. These “scholarship-granting organizations,” or SGOs, can keep up to 10 percent of the donations for administrative costs.

    In some states with existing scholarship programs, families apply with a third-party contractor that works with eligible schools and selects students for awards. Other states allow religious groups and other nonprofits to create and manage their own scholarship funds. The federal bill gives states wide flexibility to make those sorts of decisions about how the program is administered, experts say.

    Who’s eligible for the scholarships?

    To qualify, students need to check these boxes: They must be eligible to attend a public school, their state must opt in to the program, and their families must earn no more than three times the area median income — a threshold that would include households with incomes nearing $500,000 in some parts of the United States.

    Students who already attend private school qualify, since they are eligible for public school, even if they don’t attend one. The scholarships also may cover home-schoolers. (Keep reading for more on that.)

    How much money will families receive? 

    While the bill set a $1,700 cap on how much individual donors can contribute through their taxes, it’s unclear whether it limits how much an individual student could collect in scholarships.

    In theory, a student could apply for several scholarships. An SGO might also offer a scholarship that reimburses a family for all costs associated with attending their preferred school. In states that already offer similar school choice programs, a student might be able to collect scholarships from both the new program and the existing state program. Still, the average cost of private school tuition is roughly $13,000, so even students who combine several scholarships may not receive enough to cover the full cost of attending.

    The Treasury Department is expected to issue regulations on the program, and we may not know these kinds of details until it does. 

    Related: Arizona gave families public money for private schools. Then private schools raised tuition

    What can the scholarship money be used for?

    Quite a lot. The legislation suggests that families could use the money not only to help pay for private school tuition, but also for room and board, services for students with disabilities, transportation, tutoring, and school supplies like books, computers and uniforms. 

    The rules may depend on the individual state and its definition of an “eligible school.” In some states, home schooling might qualify students for the scholarships, but in other states it might not, said Robert Enlow, president of EdChoice, a pro-school choice group.  

    It’s also possible that public schools could charge scholarship students — as some do with home-schoolers — for services like tutoring, special education or advanced courses. 

    So students can use the money at public schools? How would that work? 

    Yes, potentially. In some states, schools already charge activity or participation fees for non-enrolled students who want to join clubs and sports. Marguerite Roza, director of the Edunomics Lab at Georgetown University, said some states may write their own rules that allow schools to extend the menu of services they could charge for.

    Meanwhile, most school districts — roughly 4 in 5 — already partner with foundations that raise money to help students with transportation, school supplies and basic needs. Both Enlow and Roza said they expected nonprofits and districts to partner on finding ways to tap the federal scholarship dollars as well.

    “Imagine you could have a public school foundation going out and helping with transportation and books and computers and tutors and all sorts of stuff, right?” Enlow said. “The potential is huge.”

    Will all private schools accept the scholarships? 

    No, private schools are not required to accept the scholarships, and many states that offer school choice don’t require private schools to participate. Private schools generally can accept or reject a student for any reason, whether they have a scholarship or not.

    In Arizona, for example, the tax credit program provided scholarships to students at 348 schools last year. More than 400 private schools operated in the state as of 2022.

    Related: Tracking Trump: His actions to dismantle the Education Department, and more 

    Which states will participate?

    Roughly 21 states — including Arizona, Georgia and Montana — offer their own tax credit scholarships, according to the group EdChoice, so it’s expected they would opt into the federal program. Conservative lawmakers in North Carolina already introduced a bill to allow families there to take part in the federal scholarships. 

    If public schools can benefit too, even Democratic governors may consider joining the program, said Roza.

    “Ultimately if the state can open this to summer camp and tutoring, obviously there would be a lot of pressure to unlock so much money with this,” she said.

    How much will the scholarships cost the government?

    It depends on how many taxpayers claim the credit. 

    While an earlier version of the bill would have capped the tax credits at $10 billion a year, the final legislation contains no such limit — so the exact amount in lost revenue won’t be known until much later. That said, an analysis by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation found that the legislation would cost the Treasury up to $4 billion per year.

    Others think the cost will be higher. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning research group, placed its projection closer to $51 billion, while Roza estimated the cost at $28 billion per year. Still, she hesitated to count that as a direct loss to K-12 funding. “It’s new money in the sense that it doesn’t go into or out of the federal pie,” Roza said.

    What’s been the reaction to the plan? 

    Critics, including teachers unions and many education experts, have been quick to raise alarms about the voucher program, arguing that it’s a handout for wealthy families and will harm public schools by reducing funding for them.

    “It’s the centerpiece of the Great American Heist — a privatization scheme wrapped in tax policy,” Denise Forte, president of the left-leaning nonprofit EdTrust, said at a hearing before the Senate Democratic Caucus in July. 

    Advocates for the separation of church and state worry about the program channeling money from government coffers to religious schools, while disability advocates note that private schools are not required to serve students with disabilities.

    Some supporters of school vouchers, meanwhile, wish the legislation had gone further.

    “This is a very positive program for taxpayers in America. You can help families get better education and claim a tax credit for it,” said EdChoice’s Enlow. “It’s going to benefit middle- and low-income families.” But he added, “It’s not as generous as we would like, which is universal.”

    Others are focused now on encouraging states to participate in the program. “The fight doesn’t end with the passing of the bill,” said Sydney Altfield, national director of Teach Coalition, which advocates for Jewish schools to get access to government funding. “States must opt into the program.”

    Contact staff writer Neal Morton at 212-678-8247, on Signal at nealmorton.99, or via email at [email protected].

    This story about school voucher programs was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link

  • The move from principal to district leader was fraught–here’s what I missed the most

    The move from principal to district leader was fraught–here’s what I missed the most

    This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.

    I didn’t expect to grieve.

    I knew taking a central office role meant trading the school building for a district badge. I knew the days would be filled with policy, meetings, and personnel issues. What I didn’t know was how much I would miss morning announcements, front office chatter, and the small but sacred chaos of classroom life.

    When I accepted my central office role at Knox County Schools nearly three years ago, I heard words of congratulations and encouragement, and a lot of “You’ll be great at this.” What I didn’t hear was, “You’re going to miss the cafeteria noise” or “You’ll feel phantom pain for your walkie and reach for it like it’s still there.” No one warned me I’d find myself lingering too long during school visits, trying to feel like I still belong.

    What I lost wasn’t just proximity; it was identity.

    As a principal, I was part of everything. Students shouted greetings across the parking lot. Parents stopped me in the grocery store to ask about bus routes or share weekend news. Teachers popped into my office with questions or just to drop off a piece of cake from the lounge. I wasn’t above the work. I was in it. I was woven into the messy, beautiful rhythm of a school day.

    Shifting to the central office changed not just the pace of my day, but the feel of the work. The space was quieter, the communication more deliberate. There are no morning announcements. No car rider line and morning high-fives from kids. No spontaneous TikTok dances during class change. I moved from the rhythm of a living, breathing school to a place where school leadership feels more technical, more filtered, and more removed.

    The relationships changed, too. As a principal, you’re not just part of a team; you’re a part of a family. You laugh together, carry each other’s burdens, and share both the stress and the wins. Move into a district role, and you’re now “from downtown,” even if your heart still lives on campus. You walk into buildings with a badge that means something different, and the conversations shift just enough for you to notice.

    None of this means the central office work doesn’t matter. It does. Or that I don’t love it. I do. Central office work gives me a systems-level view of how our schools function. I find purpose in improving not just individual outcomes, but the structures that guide them.

    Still, the change in relational gravity caught me off guard. And once the initial disorientation passed, it left me with a deeper concern: How will I stay connected to how the work is actually experienced and carried out in schools if I’m no longer living in it each day?

    At first, I told myself it was just a learning curve, that it would pass, that I’d find new rhythms soon enough. And I did — but not before realizing that central office leadership requires a different kind of muscle. One I hadn’t needed before.

    As a principal, I lived in fast feedback loops. I saw the effects of my decisions by lunchtime. I knew which teachers were having a hard week, which student needed extra eyes, which parent was about to call. Even hard conversations came with a certain clarity because I was close to the context and knew the culture I wanted to build.

    At the district level, the impact is broader but harder to track. The wins take longer to see. The feedback is quieter.

    I had to become more intentional about noticing what I could no longer see. That meant listening differently during school visits, paying closer attention to what leaders were navigating, and asking better questions. Not just about what was happening, but what it was costing them to make it happen.

    One of the advantages of working at a systems level is being able to recognize patterns across multiple settings. They can reveal root causes that individual concerns might never expose. That clarity opens the door to more aligned, lasting support.

    I began thinking less about whether expectations were clear and more about whether they were sustainable. My role was not to direct the work but to support the people carrying it out.

    These changes didn’t come naturally. They came because I didn’t want to become a leader who made good decisions in theory but stayed out of touch in practice. I didn’t want to lead by spreadsheet, even though color-coded tabs bring me great joy. I wanted to lead by understanding.

    Eventually, I began to see that even though I was no longer in the thick of the school day, I could still choose to stay connected — to show up, to ask real questions, to build trust not just through policy, but through presence.

    The classroom educators and school leaders I supported didn’t need someone who had knowledge of what it was like to be a teacher or principal. They needed someone who remembered what it felt like to be one. Someone who hadn’t forgotten the rush of the morning bell or the weight of a tough parent meeting or the impossible feeling of juggling school culture, teacher evaluations, instructional priorities, and a leaky roof all before noon.

    I think back often to my first year in central office. The silence. The absence of bells and kids and chaos. The invisible weight of missing something no one warned me I would lose. I remember walking through a school one afternoon and instinctively reaching for my walkie talkie. It wasn’t there. Of course it wasn’t there. But the reflex reminded me of something important: I still wanted to be tuned in.

    Leadership doesn’t have to grow lonelier as it grows broader. But staying connected takes intention. It takes habits, not just memories.

    I didn’t expect to grieve. But I’m grateful I did. Because grief has a way of reminding you what still deserves your presence.

    Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

    For more news on district management, visit eSN’s Educational Leadership hub.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Federal officials open probes into Duke University’s law journal, medical school

    Federal officials open probes into Duke University’s law journal, medical school

    Dive Brief: 

    • The U.S. Department of Education announced Monday that it has opened a civil rights investigation into Duke University and its law journal, based on allegations that the institution racially discriminates to select the publication’s editors. 
    • Separately, the Education Department and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services also sent a letter Monday to university officials saying they’re reviewing allegations that Duke’s medical school and Duke Health racially discriminate in their hiring, admissions, financial aid and recruitment practices. 
    • The probes come less than a week after U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon said officials hoped that Columbia University’s $221 million settlement with the federal government would be a “template for other universities around the country.”

    Dive Insight: 

    Like with the federal government’s previous Columbia probes, the Education Department has opened an investigation into Duke University to determine whether it has violated Title VI, which prohibits federally funded institutions from discriminating based on race, color or national origin. 

    The department said its probe is based on recent reporting that Duke Law Journal racially discriminates against students applying to be editors. It comes one month after The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication, alleged that Duke Law Journal potentially gave students applying to be editors an edge if they held leadership positions in affinity groups or if they explained how their “membership in an underrepresented group” would help them promote diverse voices. 

    Duke Law Journal shared this information only with the law school’s affinity groups, according to the Beacon. 

    The letter from HHS and the Education Department doesn’t provide the source of the allegations of racial discrimination against Duke’s medical school and Duke Health. However, it says Duke Health would be “unfit for any further financial relationship with the federal government” if the federal government determines they are true. 

    In their letter, officials suggested they want to cut a deal with the university.

    “Our Departments have historically recognized Duke’s commitment to medical excellence and would prefer to partner with Duke to uncover and repair these problems, rather than terminate this relationship,” McMahon and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote. 

    The two Cabinet secretaries demanded that the university review and reform policies at Duke Health to ensure they don’t include illegal racial preferences, including by making “necessary organizational, leadership, and personnel changes.”

    They also asked Duke to establish a Merit and Civil Rights Committee, which would be delegated authority from the university’s board, to conduct the review. 

    “The Committee must be made up of those members of Duke’s leadership and medical faculty most distinguished in and devoted to genuine excellence in the field of medicine, and the members chosen must satisfy the federal government as to their competence and good faith,” McMahon and Kennedy said in their letter. 

    McMahon and Kennedy threatened Duke with enforcement actions if the federal government and the Merit and Civil Rights Committee reach an impasse — or if they don’t change the “alleged offending policies” within six months. 

    Following Columbia’s controversial agreement with the federal government — which also included vast policy changes — law and free speech scholars warned that the Trump administration may attempt to increase their pressure campaigns against other universities to cut deals. 

    “The Trump administration has made clear that while Columbia is first in line, it intends to reach comparable agreements with other schools — to scale the Columbia shakedown into a broader model of managing universities deemed too woke,” David Pozen, a Columbia law professor, wrote in a blog post. “As has already occurred with law firms, tariffs, and trade policy, regulation by deal is coming to higher education.

    Source link

  • Sanders Introduces Bill Requiring $60,000 Minimum Salary for All Public School Teachers

    Sanders Introduces Bill Requiring $60,000 Minimum Salary for All Public School Teachers

    Senator Bernie SandersSenator Bernie Sanders introduced legislation last Thursday requiring all public school teachers to earn at least $60,000 annually, calling America’s teacher pay crisis a “national emergency” during a Capitol Hill town hall with more than 200 educators.

    The Pay Teachers Act, co-sponsored by eight Democratic senators including Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, would establish the first federal mandate for teacher salaries and represents the most ambitious federal intervention in educator compensation in decades.

    “Just four hedge fund managers on Wall Street make more money in a single year than every kindergarten teacher in America combined—over 120,000 teachers,” Sanders said. “No public school teacher in America should make less than $60,000 a year.”

    The legislation comes as schools nationwide face unprecedented staffing shortages, with nearly 200,000 teaching positions either vacant or filled by underqualified educators. According to the bill’s findings, 38% of teachers nationwide earn less than $60,000 annually, with starting teachers averaging $44,530.

    Maria Gonzalez, a third-grade teacher from Arizona who testified at the town hall, said she drives for Uber on weekends and tutors after school to pay rent. 

    “My students ask why I look tired. How do I tell them their teacher can’t afford to live in the community where she teaches?”

    The crisis extends beyond low pay. Twenty-one percent of elementary and middle school teachers’ families rely on public assistance programs including Medicaid, food stamps, and the Earned Income Tax Credit, according to a University of California, Berkeley study cited in the legislation. Additionally, 44% of public school teachers quit within five years, and 17% worked multiple jobs during the 2020-2021 school year.

    The comprehensive bill would cost approximately $400 billion over five years, funded through mandatory appropriations. Beyond the $60,000 minimum salary requirement, the legislation would triple Title I funding, provide teachers with at least $1,000 annually for classroom supplies, and mandate that paraprofessionals and education support staff earn at least $45,000 annually or $30 per hour.

    States would have four years to implement the salary requirements, with extended timelines available for states demonstrating substantial financial need. The bill also includes $50 billion annually for career ladder programs allowing teachers to advance without leaving the classroom.

    The teacher shortage disproportionately affects schools serving students of color and low-income communities, which are four times more likely to employ uncertified teachers than schools with low minority enrollment, according to federal civil rights data cited in the legislation.

    James Williams, a high school mathematics teacher from North Carolina, told the town hall that his salary purchased “a decent life” 15 years ago but now forces him to choose between car repairs and classroom supplies.

    The legislation faces significant political obstacles with Republicans controlling the House. GOP lawmakers have criticized the massive federal spending, while some education policy experts question federal involvement in traditionally state and local compensation decisions.

    Major education unions endorsed the proposal. American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten called it “a crucial federal investment to help sustain the teaching profession,” while National Education Association Vice President Princess Moss praised it as legislation that “invests in our students, educators, and public schools.”

    Sanders criticized recent Republican legislation that he said provides “$900 billion in tax cuts to large, profitable corporations and a $1 trillion tax cut to the top 1%” while cutting over $300 billion in education funding. The Trump administration is also withholding nearly $5.5 billion in congressionally appropriated education funding, according to Sanders and his colleagues.

    “If we can provide over a trillion dollars in tax breaks to the top 1% and large corporations, please don’t tell me that we cannot afford to make sure that every teacher in America is paid at least $60,000 a year,” Sanders said.

     

     

    Source link