And those who were expelled, are they out of the system now or is there a process after expulsion?
Again, that's a rather complicated situation. Under Pennsylvania law, when a student is expelled and assuming they're still of compulsory school age, initially the responsibility for their education falls back on the parent. However, if the parent either demonstrates that they 70 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 don't have the wherewithal -- although these days with charter schools and home schooling that shouldn't be the case very often. If they don't have the wherewithal or simply do not act, the School District has one of two options which we take both. One, immediately upon Board action, we notify the juvenile court of the students who are under their supervision who have just been expelled by the Board and we request them to provide an alternate education program, either of a residential or day treatment nature or in the meantime we would have to provide a minimal program which is described by the Commonwealth Court has similar to a homebound program where lessons are sent home and the student receives a tutorial of two to three hours per week. The problem with that, again, and the reason we try to work with the juvenile court is that puts the student on the street either in the neighborhood or in and around the school during the entire school week and not very much under control or supervision.
Finally, if you could just get me -- what I want to know is of those individuals in the pending category, how many of those are in a regular comprehensive high school 71 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 classroom. I'd like to come back. Thank you.
I just want to ask a question regarding, do you send the charter schools information about the child behavior if there's a discipline problem? Because many charter schools are having lots of problems out of children that evidently have a record of misbehavior and violence.
Under Act 26, Act has 13 two distinct portions. One is what do you with kids 14 with weapons. The other deals with disciplinary 15 records and retention. Under Act 26, any public 16 school, including charter schools, receiving a 17 student from another public school should and, from 18 what I know for the School District of Philadelphia, 19 does get their disciplinary records as soon as they 20 notify the School District or the school that the 21 student last attended that the student has now 22 enrolled in their program. One of the problems has 23 always been that sometimes receiving schools, 24 whether they be public schools in other districts or 25 newly formed charter schools, never notify the old 72 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 school that the student has now enrolled with them so it's a question of not only not getting disciplinary records, they don't get the shot records and they don't get the academic records.
I have a student last year at a middle school in my district, an A-B student who was, I guess, in the pending the category. I don't think they wanted to expel her, I'm not really sure, but she brought a knife to school for protection. Girls had threatened her after school the previous day. The principal thought she was a great wonderful student, never had any trouble out of her. However, until they determined what they would do with her, she was to go to Carmen. The mother was very upset, called me. I called the principal. We talked about it. So what we did, to make a long story short, send her to a charter school for eight grade. I'm not sure what's happened to her for ninth grade, but my recommendation was then at that point to keep her in the charter school system. A kid like that, that has never been in trouble before, honor roll student, what types of recourse would the mother have other than to allow 73 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 her child to go to Carmen? I know Act has -- I know there's some 4 legalities here, but all kids that are in trouble 5 aren't troublemakers. 6
That's the kind of 7 exception that principals sometime request, and when 8 they do, we frequently respond affirmatively to have 9 a child that has a good record, this is an 10 aberrational situation and well make some other kind 11 of disposition. It will frequently be the case if a 12 weapon is actually involved that it won't, 13 especially like a real life knife in a high 14 school -- 15
Or middle school. It 17 would probably be unusual to keep that student in 18 that school. It would not be unusual to send that 19 student on a lateral transfer to another school. 20 Perhaps in an instance like you described where the 21 young lady apparently said that she was carrying the 22 knife because she was afraid, a transfer to another 23 school could well take her away from the people whom 24 she was afraid of and so that may under certain 25 circumstances be the resolution. But I don't know 74 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 the particulars of that. But there are a variety of things that can be done.
I have some questions just about the plan or the proposed plan. In the plan you talk about the partnership with community behavioral health and they will be providing programs supports and interventions. What exactly are the program supports and interventions and in what charters?
Most of what that refers to are mental health supports, various kinds of counseling, for example. And in a sustained sort of way we piloted that with the Department of Health, CBH last year in the Olney and Audenried clusters, and this year that will expand, I think I'm right, to six additional clusters. I can et those six to you, but I can't tell you what they are today.
I think most people in City Council worried and are just shocked over what happened at Bartram. Particularly, I know I've been on the committee for three years and the subject of a safety plan or emergency plan has come up. I need to ask you, you do have the statement that safety is number one. Is school safety the 75 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 number one priority?
It has to be, and it does continue to be. And because if a kid or a parent of a kid or a teacher doesn't have a sense of security, then it diminishes the prospect of good teaching and learning going on. That being said, I wouldn't suggest to you for a moment that the 12,000 teachers and 212,000 kids do in fact have yet entirely that sense of safety. I will say that in the wake of all of this, it's been made clear to me by lots of people, including Dr. Burke, as I suggested in my testimony, that this is hardly a situation in which kids are running rampant throughout the school; they're just not. It's a bad wrap on the schools and what goes inside of them.
Superintendent, the tragedy of this hearing here is that we're talking about in essence making schools more like prisons rather than intellectual centers, and that is a troublesome idea to me, that's a troublesome problem. I've always said that I have not seen schools where learning is taking place have discipline problems. And you mentioned Bartram, South Philadelphia, and Olney, and Olney seems to be 76 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 having problems in which an environment of safety is needed for the learning in that very troubled school to begin taking place. And I'd like to ask you about -- because I've been getting reports from students and other individuals involved with Olney that students are almost ready to, again, as they did two years ago, do a walk-out because they don't feel safe inside the school and things are happening. And since you mentioned it in the report, I'd like to hear what you're doing about Olney in creating an environment of learning in that school that would prevent students from walking out, that would prevent 1500 kids from being absent daily at Olney that they were currently, and I believe they still are. I don't know of the attendance has gotten any better.
There are three big things that are going in Olney that I think hold for a better future. One is finally toward the end of last year and particularly in June there was a broad-based sort of I'd characterize it as seizing of responsibility, not just accepting responsibility by a broad-based group of people in the community, from the faith community and from others, with both 77 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 representatives of PIA and others leading that. And as I said to them on the evening in June, I had not been so encouraged in the last three or four years as I was that night that parents and community people were coming forward. It also included, which I also found really terrific, a group of students from Youth United for Change. That's one piece of it, and they followed through during the summer and, as I think you know, participated very deeply in the process that has identified a new principal. Which is the second thing I would say is that we still have the final checks to do, and we went true some bumps on that as was reported in the press, but the selection of Mr. Johnny Van for the principal-ship there. In fact, even after those bumps was reconfirmed by the community, was reconfirmed by the Home School Association and the site selection committee. And subject to those final routine sorts of checks, Mr. Van who has had a successful record in turning around other high schools will be the principal. The third thing that has gone on there is the selection this summer of a very strong new cluster leader there whose background is running a 78 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 successful high school. And Carlos Lopez is bringing a kind of leadership to that effort that I think holds great promise for the future of Olney. So those three things coming together, I think, I hope, will paint a different future than the one that has characterize Olney for the last 8 or 15 years. 9
Mr. Hornbeck, would you ask or direct someone to fax us another copy so we have it on the record of the information listed on the poster for health emergencies so that we may that by the end of the day? And No. 2, I wanted to ask a follow-up question on these able academies. We've been talking about discipline schools in terms of -- now, the one in my area, 49th and Wyalusing, works and I hear a lot of positive feedback from the community. Councilwoman Verna and I visited one, and it's been one of her main issues since they were formed two years ago at the Christian Street Y that was not working. So we would like to know what the follow-through on that. I know that able academy students were to be removed from class for generally 79 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 one report period and then go back. Obviously, at least at that location, those students would not have been prepared to go back after one semester. There was not the content of course work. It was basically trying to stop students from killing one another and the quietest one, trying to put her charge of the others. There was no way that they could leave a program, go back with any level of continuity and be able to continue on their school year. Have you had follow-through examinations of the able academies and what are they?
Pat Harris, Executive Assistant to the Chief of Staff. Last year we did an intensive review of all the able academies and from that we made recommendations to the Superintendent and also to cluster leaders. Part of the problem has been in the last four years the inability to get folks who are, number one, qualified to o with this kind of youngster; and number two, those willing to take on this kind of responsibility. We are seeing a large range, a wide range of a different kind of a problem now that appears to be more mental health related than perhaps is identified as a learning problem. 80 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 And what has resulted is that we probably have not provided the kind of support and professional development that the staff in those facilities needed to stay abreast of the best practices in the area of instructional strategies that they need to best intervene and then prepare the youngsters to return to the setting school. Another major piece that has been missing probably we put able academies in place is the ability to provide the psychiatric and psychological support along with some real human service type needs. So a part what we've recommended is the creation of what looks more like a mental health educational model in those sites. And as a result, what we're doing this year is forming partnerships with outside organizations to bring in those, not only psychological, psychiatric wrap-around medical social service type resources before the youngster is then assessed and returned to the sending school or similar kind of school. Another area that we were probably deficient in was actually doing a qualitative and comprehensive intake process for these youngsters. 81 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 So that what was happening was we were removing the youngster because they were problematic an in a school and actually just holding youngsters for three months or in some cases four months or longer and without really looking at reading levels, math levels, trying to get really a true psychological assessment of where a youngster was at that particular time and developing an individual behavior plan and educational plan for those youngsters so that both plans were implemented simultaneously over a three- or six-month period with some kind of assessment at the end of that intervention before returning the youngster to the school. So we are very aware that what you describe exists at a couple of the able academies, and it is our intention this year to develop a comprehensive professional development plan, which was started actually in last May, in addition to bringing in the kinds of services that we need in these sites.
Thank you. I would say, Mr. Hornbeck, that we've had many discussions in here about working with the mental 82 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 health consortium. We've had discussions here about the -- when we listed, I believe it was 4 alternative health agencies or other agencies who 5 came in to supplement and compliment the nursing 6 staff of the school and we found that was very 7 successful because students were telling them about 8 bad home situation, about abuse, about violence, et 9 cetera, et cetera. And you made the commitment that 10 you would extend those programs. That conversation has never come up again. We've had the discussion many times, I've said over the period in my opinion we have four groups of students in one class. We have those who are mentally or he emotionally ill; that's one grouping. We have another grouping who are angry or they had bad day or they're worried about getting school and they're afraid, all of that who are having bad time that day. We have a third group which the School District has never adequately dealt with, and that is those who are on ritalin, prozac, and other behavior altering drugs which the Board denies in real numbers as to what that issue is, Councilman Kenney. And then the fourth group is just the, quote unquote, normal kid that we were when we went to school and that's in a classroom. 83 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 And until we adequately and realistically address this grouping, we are going to have a problem getting special teachers because they don't know what they're going to be able to work with when they come to class. They want to teach, but they don't know who they can teach, how they can teach, and what level the kids on. If you have children junior high school who are reading on third or fourth or fifth grade level and you're teaching eight grade class, how do you deal with all those groupings? There are a lot of basic questions here that we're not addressing and we all know these are real issues. Finally, let me just say that we are very cognizant of the world we live in and the social issues that face us. We only ask that the School District, and we have a right to expect, that you have a plan for children. We know you can't implement everything, but there's no real plan and that's the disappointment of it all. You're supposed to plan, you're supposed to try to make our children safe, you're supposed to try to educate them, you're supposed to try to give them a good life. And we are here asking all of these questions 84 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 because you haven't shown us that you have a plan to take care of the all the children in the school district, and that is the sad part, that is the sorrow of it all. Thank you.
May I make a comment, please? I respectfully disagree, Ms. Blackwell. In fact, not only do we have a plan, it is the most comprehensive plan in any school district in America. And not only that, but we've got the evidence that in fact it is working in the principal areas that school districts are supposed to work, and that is that kids can read and do math and do science increasingly better and better for the most part than any other school district of any size or diversity in this country. I can't leave dangling out there that sort of observation about either the central office or the clusters or our teachers or principals. The work of the teachers and principals of this system over the last four years have in fact produced goods on the bottom line. And it is in fact recognized nationally. Moreover, it was recognized within the last 24 hours even within the state. I'm sorry that that's not the subject of 85 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 resolution or a hearing here that 57 percent of Philadelphia schools will be receiving cash awards from the State because of the improvements in academic performance and attendance, and that represents 27 percent of all the awards in the entire state. So we can leave it at the fact that we disagree about it, but the notion that we don't have a plan for all of the kids and in fact that plan is not working is not borne out by the facts.
Certainly, we do disagree on that point. We have wonderful schools. I have grandkids who go to many them from Cappa on down to elementary schools. But we do not have plan to reach those kinds at the very, very bottom of the level in some of our poorest urban schools where you can't go in a bathroom and find a clean place to use the facilities, you can't wash your hands because all the faucets are broken, you can't do these things. And to bring it to another level, I'm now Finance Chair, not Education Chair, and I will say that we meet in my area, part of my area is University City. The University of Pennsylvania, as you know, we've had meetings with you about building a new school. They have to build 86 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 that school because in one neighborhood, Spruce Hill, our home ownership was down to like 3 percent because of the fact that our schools were so poor. Now, whether or not we have good schools affects our base, it affects folks moving in our city, it makes people leave our city, and it's not the moral thing, the right thing to do and the issue for which you have a responsibility, but it also affects the very survival of our city. We've got to have a plan and one that pulls those schools at the bottom up as well as maintains those great schools like the Cappas and Centrals and Girls High, and the Mastermans and Lambertons that are already doing fine. And with that, I say thank you and I'm finished.
Thank you very much. I want to go back again to some of the issues of reporting and incidents of violence. According to the Daily News, in your statement given October 12, 1999, it was reported 905 incidents of students possessing a weapon were reported to the Philadelphia Police Department. Of those instances, how many students were in fact expelled? 87 RESOLUTION NO. 990650
No, this is October 12, 1999. The Daily News reported that, and the statement issued by Dr. Hornbeck was reported that 905 incidents of students possessing a weapon were reported to the Philadelphia Police Department. I would imagine the last year. Of those incidents, how many students were expelled? I think this is a statement you gave at Bartram.
I'm just looking for -- 905 last year, so that must have been '98-'99.
Last year, I guess that's '98-'99. Something in the neighborhood of -- let us send you that, Councilman Kenney.
Okay. On January 1999, it was reported that a student pulled a .22 88 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 caliber automatic pistol out in class and pointed it at another student at Bartram High School. The teacher quoted in the report was Beverly Beck. Is there any way to found out how the situation was dealt with, where the student is now? And considering the fact that on January 13, 1999, we had a student pull out a .22 semiautomatic in class, would that not have indicated the need for metal detectors immediately as opposed to -- maybe we should have moved the one we moved out of Shallcross to Bartram if in fact kids were actually pointing a gun out in school prior to this incident with the on vice principal.
At Bartram. Potentially, we had an incident that indicated that there was a weapons problem, or at lease one weapon problem in that particular school months before the incident that almost ended the life of a vice principal.
That was one of the seven 89 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 high schools that year. It was no doubt one of the factors that was taken into account when we decided to have Bartram be one of the places that we put metal detectors.
From January '99 -- we went through this about the delay, but January '99 through September '99 is quite some time. Could you tell me what a special ed student is and what qualifies a student as a special ed student?
Well, under federal law, a special education student is a student who has a disability and that disability gets in the way of his learning.
Any disability? My non-professional understanding of a special ed student is a student who is confined to a wheelchair, a student who has a visual impairment, a hearing impairment, a mental impairment towards learning. What other types of special ed students are there? Could you look at a student be able to tell whether or not that student is a special ed student.
I'm not sure you included emotional disturbance in your categories. If you did, then --
Well, then that's one thing. There is a very large number of students that sort of are normally referred to as kids with learning disabilities. Dyslexia is probably the best known one of these and that has to do with the way the brain processes information and you can't tell -- who was it, Roosevelt who was Dyslexic? You couldn't tell that he was disabled. But there was a second part to the definition which is real important and that is that the disability actually gets in the way of learning. Sometimes it doesn't get in the way of learning and so they're not a special ed student.
A student who displays outrageous behavior in the classroom or who 91 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 acts out, screams out, gets up and walks around, disrupts the classroom, is that generally categorized as a special ed student?
Is that not an emotional type of problem that would classify or potentially classify that student as a special ed student.
The student might be a kid with a disability, but it may be that he's just a bad kid, too.
What happens when a special ed student brings a weapon to school?
That falls under those categories that Mr. Tishler was referring to. The law provides, and you guys correct me if I'm wrong, that if the behavior of a student, whatever the infraction is, is determined to be the consequence of the student's disability in contrast to being just a bad kid, then that student is accorded certain protections and he can't be expelled and he has to be provided for in some programmatic manner.
In the first instance, school personnel do. If the parents agree with the decision of school personnel, then that's the decision. If the parents don't agree, then there is a due process procedure that can in fact ultimately end up in court. And I think I'm right that there have been instances in which the Court of Appeals and maybe even the Supreme Court has made those decisions.
But are school personnel qualified to make a decision on whether or not that child should be classified as a special ed student?
Who makes that decision? Is there a school psychiatrist or psychologist?
Not in every school, but it is a psychologist that most often is the moving party in doing certain psychological evaluations. There are other school personnel that are involved 93 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 in determining program placement, but the psychologist is a key person.
But predominately or primarily based on the opinion of that particular psychologist of this individual that is creating a disturbance or in fact brings a weapon or in fact creates a violent incident, that particular psychologist could determine whether or not that child is going remain in that classroom setting and whether or that disruption and violence and potential is going to continue in that building?
Bernard Trent, I'm the Safety Advisor for the School District, I'm also a psychologist. The answer to your question is it's a team decision, and that team is supposed to collect data and undertake what's called a nexus inquiry manifestation determination. The law also provides for removal of that student if he or she presents as an immanent threat to health, welfare, safety of self and others to an alternate placement for 45 days, during which time the School District supposed to initiate due process to make that placement permanent. So there is a mechanism and place for 94 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 removal of those types of students.
Theoretically, that team approach is applied to a student who has brought a gun to a school or who has created a violent incident or assault on another student, and that team decides that child is a special education student or should be classified as one. The potential exists that that student would remain in that school in that class in the vicinity of the child he or she assaulted with the student body and the teachers that he or she may have pulled a gun on and nothing can be done in that?
No, theoretically, no, that should not happen. As I indicated, the way the law is written now, if in deed that student presents as a threat although he or she is special ed, they can be removed for 45 days. During that 45-day period, the school is supposed to undertake or initiate due process to either make the placement permanent or, as I indicated, to definitely make a determination as to whether the program was appropriate. But the student can be removed from the school.
But the student can be returned to the school? 95 RESOLUTION NO. 990650
Ultimately yes, and the 1997 amendment to the federal law significantly increased that as a possibility.
Could we get some information on the last year how many of those individuals who went through this process were evaluated, were put into 45-day alternative setting, were returned back to either the school where they created the incident or to another comprehensive high school or middle school without the knowledge of the staff and other parents and student body about what it is that kid was being transferred there for?
Let me tell you my concern. My concern is is that the federal government has created this special education classification that has gone far beyond what any of us would normally would understand to be special education or students with disabilities, far beyond that. There are behavioral issues, other types of issues that create disturbances and potentially cause violence in the school. What I'm concerned about is if that individual has exhibited that 96 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 violence, simply because of the over-parameter protections of this special ed classification, this individual could potentially be put back into a classroom with someone's children, with our children, without having any of the necessary precautions that could create potentially another violent incident with a gun, with a knife, with a weapon or with some physical assault. And one of the things that Councilperson Blackwell is talking about is that people having confidence in sending thier kids to the public school system or staying in Philadelphia because of their public school or educational choices, that kind of situation is intolerable. Now, you may say, and I understand if you do, that the federal government is in some way put this our backs. But I got to believe there must be some way within this system that we can identify these young people and remove them from our midst within those comprehensive schools and middle schools so that we can create a safe environment. I haven't agreed with a lot of what Dr. Hornbeck has said today or otherwise, but I will say one thing, this is small group of people that are 97 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 causing this problem. The overall number of children in or schools are good, decent, hard-working kids of various levels of ability and achievement. But they will not ever achieve and cannot ever achieve if a small group of disruptive, violent psychotic people are permitted to stay in those buildings threatening staff, intimidating students and creating havoc. Now, federal guidelines, federal policies, federal laws aside, there's got to be a way we can work our way through this, know who these people are and remove them in a permanent way. And whether they have to go to -- when I was a kid, Daniel Boone, whether they have to be transferred out to Glen Mills, whether they have to go to some form of a prison, I don't really care. All I know is unless we can remove these children from this system, we're never going to engender any confidence in it with anybody.
Thank you, Councilman. Just a few more. I think Councilwoman Miller has a request for information.
Yes, I do. In the information packets that were forwarded to this 98 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 committee, both committees and its members, I am requested a description of terms like wrap-around and are children that receive wrap-around services in regular classrooms or are they separated in another classroom? But I think we just can't assume that acronyms that are used in your everyday language people here understanding. And the type of child that would be -- I'm just using wrap-around as an example -- that would be assigned a wrap-around person. Also, I'd like to know more about the Houston project. I read it in the paper. I'd really like to get some information on that. And I actually went into the internet -- I'm teaching myself have how to use the computer -- to try and find information on the Houston project, and I guess I couldn't find it. But isn't that the disciplinary project that you want to use here in Philadelphia?
And according to the resolution and YOUR testimony is more or less a detailing of programs that are currently within the 99 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 district. The resolution calls for a plan, a plan that you can submit to the committee that details what steps are taking place and so on down the line to ensure, as it says, to guarantee the safety of all school children. And if you can have a narrative of that plan put together and sent to us within two weeks, we would really appreciate that.
I will try to do that. It will be partial at that point because the work with Mr. DiBerardinis and Mr. Timoney will not have been completed by then, but we can certainly give you a paragraph on each of the things that we're doing and how we're doing it and together that in fact is our plan for safety in the schools.
Well, once we get that detailed plan -- if you need time, can you tell me how much more time you need? We would like to have a hearing in order to discuss the plan as it's detailed by you, Commissioner Timoney and Mike DiBerardinis and so on and go over that. I don't want to get a plan that is not complete.
Well, my guess is that it will be probably the second week or so in November before Mr. Timoney and Mr. DiBerardinis, Ms. Post, 100 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 Judge Pinto and I get together. I don't know what they're going to suggest. I can tell you by the end of the November what the process will be. One of the things, for example, that I hope that the Commissioner may well want to do is a kind of security audit of schools across the city. And if he thinks that makes sense, then I would be able to tell you that that's what we're going to do, but I would not probably until much later than that to be able to --
We do not expect that, but if you can do that, I think the committee, Ms. Miller and I will appreciate it. We would make it accessible to the record. Councilman Kenney, you have one last point?
I'd also like to recommend that until we receive this report in its comprehensive form, there has been plans, I believe, to do some type of transfer ordinance through the Appropriations Committee as we have done annually for $15 million to the District. I would like go perhaps discuss the opportunity of putting some strings upon those dollars to be used directly for 101 RESOLUTION NO. 990650 the results of what this audit and what the recommendations of the audit would be to ensure that a portion of those dollars at least would be used to provide all the necessary equipment, training, staffing that is necessary to ensure that we have safety within those schools. Now, I recognize our charter issues, but if you want the million, 9 perhaps we can get some side agreement that this 10 money will be used to totally and comprehensively 11 staff and supply our schools, all of the, were the 12 necessary equipment and training necessary to keep 13 them safe. 14 I mean, I think I voted in favor of the 15 additional appropriations all but at one time and I would I would feel better at least personally if I knew a portion of that money were going specifically to be used to keep our kids safe.
I think, Councilman Kenney, that presents all sorts of charter issues.
We will ask the Commissioner, the Superintendent, and the City Solicitor. 102 RESOLUTION NO. 990650
Superintendent, I would expect that that plan towards the end of November we would have that, and soon right after that we will schedule a hearing of this joint committee, all right?
The Committee on Education and Public Safety on Resolution 990650 stands at recess to the call of the chair. (Council adjourned at 4:15 p.m.) - - - 103 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of October 21, 1999, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION and PUBLIC SAFETY ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public